Subject: [manet] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-manet-dlep-latency-extension-04: (with COMMENT)

From: Roman Danyliw via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 04 Aug 2019 18:21:20 -0700

Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-manet-dlep-latency-extension-04: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-manet-dlep-latency-extension/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

A few questions on unexpected values:

** Section 3.  How do the maximum and minimum latency fields relate?  For
example, what happens if a receiver gets a message where the maximum latency is
smaller than the minimum latency.

** Section 3.  How do the latency data item and the latency range item relate? 
For example, what happens if a receiver gets a message that has both a latency
data item and a latency range data item, and the reported latency is outside of
the latency range?