Re: [Rmt] AD comments on draft-ietf-rmt-pi-alc-revised-06

[Brian Adamson <adamson at itd.nrl.navy.mil>]

As Magnus says, I don't think you could write the section ahead of  
time without knowing the domain.

But, perhaps something that could be done in such a similar section  
would be to identify the specific aspects / requirements on the  
protocol that are due to "Internet Considerations" as opposed to the  
aspects/requirements of the protocol for its general operation.  Then,  
this section would provide a focal point for profiling for other (non- 
Internet) domains ... i.e, the profiling could address any deviations  
from the "Internet Considerations".  For example, mandated congestion  
control would be identified in that "Internet Considerations" section  
and other profiles could then specify their own qualifications and/or  
deviations from considerations such as congestion control, security,  
etc that might not be germain to the protocol's operation in those  
other domains ...

Just some thoughts on what Mark suggested.  Probably some IESG thought  
would be in order here?


Brian Adamson
adamson at itd.nrl.navy.mil




On Jun 3, 2009, at 4:50 AM, Magnus Westerlund wrote:

> Watson, Mark skrev:
> > Magnus,
> >
> > What I was suggesting as a standard RFC section a bit like “Security
> > Considerations” in which the “Other domains” requirements should be
> > collected, with guidelines as to what kind of thing should go in  
> > there.
> > Then the rest of the document is unambiguously applicable to the
> > Internet domain. Obviously the content of this section would be very
> > dependent on the protocol being defined.
> >
> > In a sense, this section would be the IETF doing the necessarily
> > profiling for other standards groups itself (hopefully avoiding the
> > risks you cite below). This happens anyway, but I’m suggesting we  
> > make
> > it more explicit so that we do not keep repeating the argument about
> > whether Internet domain requirements are MUST or SHOULD for protocols
> > which have other domains of applications.
>
> Sorry Mark, I don't understand how I am going to be able to write  
> such a
> section without knowing which domain it is for. Only when you know  
> your
> domain and what features it has can you determine what you may not
> require in terms of security protocol or congestion control, or
> configuration support.
>
> Maybe, I am misunderstanding you?
>
> Cheers
>
> Magnus Westerlund
>
> IETF Transport Area Director & TSVWG Chair
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVM
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Ericsson AB                | Phone  +46 10 7148287
> Färögatan 6                | Mobile +46 73 0949079
> SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden| mailto: magnus.westerlund at ericsson.com
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Rmt mailing list
> Rmt at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rmt