I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART)
reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see
http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html).
Document: draft-ietf-manet-jitter-04
Reviewer: Christian Vogt
Review Date: 12/23, 2007
IETF LC End Date: 11/29, 2007
Summary: Ready for publication
Comments:
This document is well written, understandable, and has a convincing
problem statement. I hence believe that it was the right decision to
put it into the RFC Editor queue. Below are a few comments that the
authors may want to address, to the extent possible, during AUTH48:
(1) Section 3, "Applicability Statement":
These mechanisms are intended for application where the underlying
medium access control and lower layers do not provide effective
mechanisms to avoid such collisions.
It would be useful to state what could happen if jittering was
(accidentally) performed at lower and upper layers simultaneously. Such
double jittering would clearly result in different jitter intervals, and
an additional sentence should state this IMO. But it seems unlikely
that double jittering could ever break a protocol, and this should be
state, too.
(2) Section 5.3., "Message Forwarding", first considers jitter on a
message basis and then specifies what should happen if multiple messages
are sent in a single packet. I believe that jittering is relevant only
at the packet level. The section would hence be more straightforward if
it discussed jittering on the packet level from the very beginning.
(3) Introduction of section 4, "Protocol Overview and Functioning":
Using such
protocols simultaneous transmissions from two (or more) adjacent
nodes may cause delays, packet losses and other problems.
Better add a comma after "protocols", for the sentence is otherwise
very hard to parse.
Hope this helps, and happy holidays!
- Christian
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
