> section 2.1 " and available power." -> should it be "and available > power/energy." ?
Yes. Changed it to "available power and energy". > section 2.2.1. ; term "MSL" -> perhaps write it out in full here. Similar as > done with the DTN term in the same section. Indeed (I already had done that based on another editorial comment). > section 4.3: could we mention here the term "sleepy device" as being > equivalent, or an alternative for, the "Always-off" class? > I've seen the term "sleepy" more often used than the term > "Always-off". The latter term may be confusing (try explaining to a colleague > that you want to communicate with an always-off device...) Well, just tell them that you want to communicate with an S0-class device. The problem I have with "sleepy" is that it is not clear whether S0 or S1 is meant. Trying to assign a specific meaning to an existing overloaded term is nearly impossible, inventing a new term is much better. Of course, "always-off" is a bit provocative... Good that we have the numeric classes, too. Grüße, Carsten _______________________________________________ Lwip mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip
