[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [btns] Minor connection-latch problem in AUTH48



On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 09:30:08AM -0700, Laganier, Julien wrote:
> So how about:
> 
> Such an implementation may require an additional transient state in
> the connection latch state machine: a "LARVAL" state, so to speak, to
> which the connection is latched pending establishment of the SA. Such
> a "LARVAL" state is not described further herein.

"transient" seems confusable/redundant to me: all these states are
transient, in a way, since a latch is never permanently in one state.

In the case of the CLOSED state I used the word "fleeting"; "ephemeral"
would work just as well.  I will use the word "fleeting", since I've
already used it to the same effect.  I'll send an updated .xml file to
the RFC-Editor later today.

Thanks!

Nico
-- 

Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.