IPv6 over the TSCH mode of IEEE 802.15.4e
charter-ietf-6tisch-02

Thanks for addressing my review.

"The scope of the WG includes one or more LLNs..."

I think you mean "The extent of the problem space for the WG is one or more LLNs..."

1) (1st sentence) Low power or Low-power?  Roll definitely uses the later.

2) Is there a separate LLN protocol stack that is different than say an IP protocol stack?  Maybe you could r/LLN protocol stack/protocol stack

3) Not sure the following is needed because it sounds like advertising - just delete the sentence and merge the 2nd and 3rd paragraphs:

It inherits from long-standing industrial process control standards such as WirelessHART and ISA100.11a, while significantly improving reliability, determinism, and power comsumption.

4) There's a little redundancy in the following and it's not clear you really need to list the other wgs that might or might not be around:

The WG will interface with other IETF WGs, potentially including ROLL, 6Lo, CoRE, 6MAN, LWIG, and other appropriate groups in the IETF Internet, Routing and Security areas.

maybe:

The WG will interface with other appropriate groups in the IETF Internet, Routing and Security areas.

5) Never heard the term "umbrella networks" is it common term?

6) Is there any particular order of the work items? I.e., is the architecture document to completed first?

7) Probably worth noting that the non-milestone work items shouldn't affect the milestone work items.

I'm not asking these questions out of *any knowledge* of IEEE 802.15.4e *at all*, so if they are silly questions, please say so.

This version of the charter describes doing static scheduling, with an option to do dynamic scheduling if static scheduling goes well.

Is the static version useful on its own, if the working group doesn't deliver dynamic scheduling?

If dynamic scheduling is also delivered, is there any requirement for coexistence of the two modes in  a single network?

I fully support Adrian's blocking comment.