Gabor,

Thanks for the suggestions. I'll incorporate them into a new draft.

-vince


On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 3:37 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:

> Here are some comments to the draft:
>
> You may want to define the ruleset, listing service, listing server in the
> terminology section.
>
> Section 3.1, bullet 2 says that "The Database may use the rule-set list to
> determine its response", which I think is not right. The Database uses the
> location of the master device to determine its response, and the required
> parameters and ruleset to be supported are sent back to the master device
> based on the device's location.
>
> Section 4 starts with listing the components of paws. Spectrum use notify
> is missing from that list.
>
> Section 4.1 has this sentence: " A Device SHOULD support operation in any
> regulatory environment." It must be some leftover which I think should be
> deleted.
>
> Section 4.1, configuration update:
> s/SHOULD be able to update/SHOULD update, 2 instances
> when the URI changes, the inclusion of the DbUpdateSpec should be a MUST
> instead of SHOULD. Same comment for the next sentence (s/SHOULD/MUST)
>
> Section 5.1
> Both point and region are listed as optional for the Geolocation element.
> But one of them has to be present.
> The Note below the figure says " Note: point and polygon are mutually
> exclusive", while it should say " Note: point and region are mutually
> exclusive"
> In several places you have 'depends'; expand what does it depend on.
>
> " If present, it indicates that the GeoLocation represents a
>       region.  Database support for regions is OPTIONAL."
> I would delete the second sentence, and instead state in 4.4.3 that the
> support for this request is optional.
>
> "   center:  The center refers to the location of a GeoLocation point and
>       is represented as the center of an ellipse.  REQUIRED."
> What does the REQUIRED word mean here? That the parameter center must
> always be present? That doesn't seem to be right as the ellipse shape may
> not be present (instead the polygon may be present).
>
> Throughout section 6, where you define the schemas, the description field
> is broken up into multiple lines and you have quotation marks and + signs
> in all lines. It would improve the readability of the document if you
> removed those quotation marks and + signs.
>
> - Gabor
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
> Bajko Gabor (Nokia-CIC/SiliconValley)
> Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2013 10:18 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [paws] WGLC on
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-paws-protocol-06
>
> All,
>
> The Editor of the document posted a new version and indicated that all
> open issues raised on the list were resolved, and that there are no more
> open issues he is aware of.
> Therefore, I'd like to issue a wg last call on the document. We need
> reviews and feedback in order to be able to progress the document.
>
> Please read through the draft and send any comments you may have to the
> list in the next 2-3 weeks.
> If you review the draft and have no comments, send a note to the list that
> the draft is good as it is, we need these notes as much as we need the
> actual comments.
>
> Thanks, Gabor
> _______________________________________________
> paws mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws
> _______________________________________________
> paws mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws
>



-- 
-vince
_______________________________________________
paws mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws

Reply via email to