Robert,

Thanks for the review.


On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 2:55 PM, Robert Sparks <[email protected]> wrote:

> This all looks very good to me.
>
> I've reviewed the diff between 12 and 14, and read through 14.
> Thanks for the very nice work on simplifying section 6, Vincent!
>
> This isn't worth holding the document up in any way, but as it's going
> through the rest of it's processing
> consider, in 6.1,  saying that the id should be generated uniquely enough
> to allow the use of JSON-RPC batch?
>

Hmmm...I'm now not sure we should support JSON-RPC batching, since batching
is built into some of the
PAWS methods:

 - AVAIL_SPECTRUM_BATCH_REQ
 - DEV_VALID_REQ

It might get confusing to support two different mechanisms.


>
> RjS
>
>
>
> On 7/31/14, 2:33 PM, Pete Resnick wrote:
>
>> On 7/31/14 2:31 PM, Barry Leiba wrote:
>>
>>> Given that I want to update the IANA language some more, I have another
>>>> draft ready to upload (incorporating these changes). Should I do that
>>>> now?
>>>>
>>> I think you should, unless Pete has other ideas for some reason.  As I
>>> always say: revisions are cheap.
>>>
>>
>> Yeah, please go right ahead. Once I hear from Robert, I will likely send
>> this out for a second Last Call, given the extent of the changes, so having
>> the latest-and-greatest in there would be good.
>>
>> pr
>>
>>
>


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

Reply via email to