Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-ietf-lpwan-schc-over-sigfox-18
review-ietf-lpwan-schc-over-sigfox-18-opsdir-lc-wu-2022-12-24-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-lpwan-schc-over-sigfox
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 23)
Type Last Call Review
Team Ops Directorate (opsdir)
Deadline 2022-12-20
Requested 2022-12-06
Authors Juan-Carlos Zúñiga , Carles Gomez , Sergio Aguilar , Laurent Toutain , Sandra Cespedes , Diego S. Wistuba La Torre , Julien Boite
I-D last updated 2022-12-24
Completed reviews Intdir Last Call review of -17 by Jean-Michel Combes (diff)
Iotdir Last Call review of -16 by Behcet Sarikaya (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -20 by Elwyn B. Davies (diff)
Tsvart Last Call review of -17 by Colin Perkins (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -18 by Bo Wu (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Bo Wu
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-lpwan-schc-over-sigfox by Ops Directorate Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ops-dir/duQJ8ekCJYMD_kzxxC2ey8KaCMo
Reviewed revision 18 (document currently at 23)
Result Has nits
Completed 2022-12-24
review-ietf-lpwan-schc-over-sigfox-18-opsdir-lc-wu-2022-12-24-00
Hi authors,

I am the assigned Opsdir reviewer.

Summary: This is a standard track publication. This document defines a profile
of SCHC (RFC 8724) for use in Sigfox networks and provides parameter values and
modes of operation.

Major issues:None

Minor issues:Yes

1. Section 1:
Sigfox is an LPWAN technology  that offers energy-efficient
   connectivity for devices at a very low cost.  Sigfox brings a
   worldwide network composed of Base Stations that receive short (12
   bytes)  uplink messages sent by devices over the long-range Sigfox
   radio protocol.

This paragraph gives an overview of Sigfox and also gives some details, such as
12 bytes uplink messages. It would be clearer that a reference of Sigfox
specification can be provided. Regarding 12 bytes uplink messages, why is it
emphasized here? This is not mentioned in the sections 3.2 uplink and Section
3.8. Padding says 12 bytes payload. The same applies to 8 bytes downlink
messages.

2. Section 2:
It is suggested that Terminology can be added, such as RSSI, Dtag needs some
definition.

3. Section 3:
About "Provisioning protocol", can you give an example? Is this suggesting
Netconf protocol?

4. Section 3.1
The terms used in the architecture figure 1 and the document are little
confusing.

In the figure 1, only sigfox device and Sigfox BS is marked, are the other
network entities not part of sigfox network? Maybe the scope of the sigfox
network can be provided. It is suggested to be consistent that Network Gateway
(NGW) is called the Sigfox cloud-based Network or cloud-based Sigfox Core
Network?

5. Section 3.4 SCHC-ACK on Downlink
Section 3.3 Downlink and Section 3.4 are parallel sections. Should section 3.4
be subsection of Section 3.3?

6. Section 3.6.1.5 All-1 and RCS behaviour
It is better to add a complete title name, e.g. All-1 SCHC Fragments?

Minor Nits:

7.Abstract
s/The present document/The document

8. Consistency in section title
s/3.6.1.1 SCHC-Sender Abort/ 3.6.1.1 SCHC Sender-Abort
3.7 SCHC-over-Sigfox F/R Message Formats –> SCHC over Sigfox F/R Message Formats
3.7.3.4.  SCHC Sender-Abort Messages-> SCHC Sender-Abort Message format
3.7.3.5  SCHC Receiver-Abort Message -> SCHC Receiver-Abort Message format
The same applies to::
3.7.4.4.  SCHC Sender-Abort Messages
3.7.4.4.  SCHC Sender-Abort Messages
3.7.5.4.  SCHC Sender-Abort Messages
3.7.5.5.  SCHC Receiver-Abort Message