Toerless Eckert <t...@cs.fau.de> wrote:
> This email starts a three-week adoption call for drafts
> draft-richardson-anima-masa-considerations
> draft-richardson-anima-registrar-considerations
> The timeline is longer than the usual two weeks because it is two drafts
> (and we also want to ask for other adoptions in parallel).
> THese two drafts have been updated by the authors repeatedly following
> track with operational considerations related to ongoing BRSKI
specification/
> deployment work:
> These two drafts collect operational considerations that often came out
> of work on working on BRSKI protocol specifications and implementation
> experience. Having them as official part of our work should help making it
> easier to avoid discussing operational considerations across other BRSKI
> specs in those specs.
Thank you.
I will note that some of the content of the draft, for instance the list of
cities in the registrar-considerations was put there with the intention of
explaining some anticipated operational considerations... but that text never
got written. I've left it there with the idea that it might get completed,
but at this point, there is probably a bunch of text that could just be removed.
> When you support this adoption, it would be good to know if you have an
> opinion whether these drafts should be merged ("BRSKI operational
considerations"),
> or if they should stay separate (MASA vs Registrar).
That's not something I had thought about; I have no fundamental objection.
> Another important aspect is target status of Best Current Practice or
> Informational. Please tell us your opinion.
A third option is that they just get adopted and never published, and/or turned
into wiki content. Adoption would be a sign that the WG would like to
conntribute on a (rough) consensus basis, rather than just be about the
concerns I thought about as I did my Minerva reference implementation.
A few of those concerns were identified early enough that they resulted in
some adjustment to text in 8995, some other text would up in cBRSKI.
Particularly around what exactly the MASA pins.
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
-= IPv6 IoT consulting =- *I*LIKE*TRAINS*
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Anima mailing list -- anima@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to anima-le...@ietf.org
