Last Call Review of draft-ietf-6lo-minimal-fragment-08
review-ietf-6lo-minimal-fragment-08-genart-lc-palombini-2020-01-30-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-6lo-minimal-fragment
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 15)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2020-01-31
Requested 2020-01-17
Authors Thomas Watteyne , Pascal Thubert , Carsten Bormann
I-D last updated 2020-01-30
Completed reviews Intdir Last Call review of -04 by Dave Thaler (diff)
Iotdir Last Call review of -04 by Ines Robles (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -10 by Derrell Piper (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -09 by Sarah Banks (diff)
Tsvart Last Call review of -07 by Joerg Ott (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -08 by Francesca Palombini (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Francesca Palombini
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-6lo-minimal-fragment by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/to625sRrMoO4G_ChBGcFNA_Q0Xk
Reviewed revision 08 (document currently at 15)
Result Ready w/nits
Completed 2020-01-30
review-ietf-6lo-minimal-fragment-08-genart-lc-palombini-2020-01-30-00
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.

For more information, please see the FAQ at

<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Document: draft-ietf-6lo-minimal-fragment-08
Reviewer: Francesca Palombini
Review Date: 2020-01-30
IETF LC End Date: 2020-01-31
IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat

Summary: This draft is basically ready for publication. However, I noticed the
normative reference to an informative document,
draft-ietf-lwig-6lowpan-virtual-reassembly (ref. 'LWIG-VRB'), which is
problematic, since this draft is on the standard track.

Major issues: -

Minor issues: -

Nits/editorial comments:

* Last paragraph of Section 5, I suggest a minor reformulation for clarity.

OLD:
   An associated
   caveat is that on a half duplex radio, if node A sends the next
   fragment at the same time as node B forwards the previous fragment to
   a node C down the path then node B will miss the next fragment.
NEW:
   An associated
   caveat is that on a half duplex radio, if node A sends the next
   fragment at the same time as node B forwards the previous fragment to
   a node C down the path then node B will miss the next fragment from node A.