Michael

thanks and I'm okay if y'all are okay (etc etc).

Thanks for addressing my comments

tim


On Sun, Jul 27, 2025 at 5:17 PM Michael Richardson <[email protected]>
wrote:

>
> Tim Wicinski <[email protected]> wrote:
>     > moving this up away from the nits:
>     >> > The two figures are very nice, but I would argue they should be
>     >> placed > after each paragraph describing them, rather together.
> But I
>     >> may be > wrong.
>     >>
>     >> So you'd move them out of the Architecture which is trying to
> explain
>     >> why there are different requirements, into the Protocol solution?
> You
>     >> aren't wrong.  I don't know, because I know the document too well.
>     >> Section 4 also has more detailed time-sequence diagrams.
>     >>
>     >>
>     > Actually, more like putting each one after each paragraph in the
>     > Architecture section which describes them.  "For use case one, ...."
>     > then the diagram.  Same for "For use case two...."
>
>     > does that make more sense?  it's a six of one and when I was
> reviewing
>     > it just the back and forth could be avoided some.  I will go with
>     > whatever the consensus says.
>
> I've moved the architecture diagrams up to the spot where they are first
> introduced.  That meant moving a bit more text around.
>
> It's an update to the PR.
>
>
> --
> Michael Richardson <[email protected]>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
>            Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
>
>
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Anima mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to