Subject: [6lo] Review of draft-ietf-6lo-ghc-00

From: Ulrich Herberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2014 22:35:23 +0000

Carsten,

I have reviewed draft-ietf-6lo-ghc-00, and think it's well done and well
written. I very much like the brevity of the draft, although I think that
in section 2 it's a little too short. A little more explanations could help
to ease implementers to understand the draft.

In particular, some of the terms and variables could be explained more,
such as "backreference", "destination buffer", "sa" + "na" variables, "s" +
"n" variables, "extended arguments for a back reference", "expansion
buffer", "static dictionary", "predefined dictionary", "target buffer".
(btw, is the "target buffer" the same as the "destination buffer" and the
"final result"? and clarify distinction between "static dictionary" and
"predefined dictionary"). For the pseudo-header from RFC2460, it could help
to also cite the section where it is defined in that RFC. Some rationale
how the static dictionary was selected could also be helpful.
Also, at least one of the examples could expand what the precise actions
have to be to get from the initial byte sequence to the result.

Best regards
Ulrich