#105: IESG comment #14 (by Tim Polk) - Inconsistency in Fig. 1 and Section 3.2
------------------------------------+---------------------------------------
Reporter: carle...@… | Owner:
Type: defect | Status: new
Priority: minor | Milestone:
Component: routing-requirements | Version:
Severity: - | Keywords:
------------------------------------+---------------------------------------
The text in Figure 1 and section 3.2 is inconsistent. (Figure 1 "shows
the place of 6LoWPAN routing in the entire network stack.")
From 3.2:
In the simplest case for a Mesh Under where layer two forwarding can be
performed without piggy-backing routing protocol information, the mesh-
header defined in RFC 4944 [RFC4944] is sufficient, see Figure 5.
This implies that the 6LoWPAN routing could occur in the IEEE 802.15.4 MAC
layer. I realize that ascii art has its limitations, but if that is
correct a note in the accompanying text in section 3
would be helpful.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/6lowpan/trac/ticket/105>
6lowpan <http://tools.ietf.org/6lowpan/>
_______________________________________________
6lowpan mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
