I think "MAY include channel numbers" is somewhat ambiguous. I would prefer "MAY support specification of this information by channel number".
-Pete [email protected] wrote: > Folks, > > > > During the last F2F meeting, there was an agreement to make a slight > update to requirement D.7 in http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-paws- > problem-stmt-usecases-rqmts-06.txt <http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf- > paws-problem-stmt-usecases-rqmts-06.txt> , to make channel numbers > optional to be supported. Ie, change the current D.7 > > "The Data Model MUST support specifying a list of available channels. > The Data Model MUST support specification of this information by > channel numbers and by start and stop frequencies. The Data Model MUST > support a channel availability schedule and maximum power level for > each channel in the list." > > to > > "The Data Model MUST support specifying a list of available channels. > The Data Model MUST support specification of this information by start > and stop frequencies and MAY include channel numbers. The Data Model > MUST support a channel availability schedule and maximum power level > for each channel in the list." > > > > I'd like to confirm this change on the list. If anyone has any > objections, let me know. Otherwise I'll plan to send the document to > the iesg after this change is implemented. > > > > - Gabor _______________________________________________ paws mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws
