Dear Toeless, all,
I support adoption of both documents. As we have seen in the creation of
different BRSKI variants, there is a benefit for having a discussion on
operational considerations and provide support for integrators and operators.
My gut feeling would be to combine both drafts as you suggested and have a
single document addressing both, registrar and MASA. While there may be a
benefit of distinct drafts as they target different operators, I would see a
higher value to see the combined boundary conditions for the overall solution
in a single draft.
Best regards
Steffen
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Toerless Eckert <t...@cs.fau.de>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 7, 2025 4:56 PM
> To: anima <anima@ietf.org>
> Cc: anima-chairs <anima-cha...@ietf.org>; mjethanand...@gmail.com
> Subject: [Anima] Adoption call for BRSKI operation considerations ( draft-
> richardson-anima-masa-considerations , draft-richardson-anima-registrar-
> considerations ) ending 05/29
>
> Dear ANIMA WG enthusiasts
>
> 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.
>
> 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).
>
> Another important aspect is target status of Best Current Practice or
> Informational. Please tell us your opinion.
>
> ---
> Toerless Eckert (for the chairs)
>
> _______________________________________________
> Anima mailing list -- anima@ietf.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to anima-le...@ietf.org
_______________________________________________
Anima mailing list -- anima@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to anima-le...@ietf.org
