> On Jul 17, 2015, at 6:16 PM 7/17/15, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello Ralph > >> The recommendation for the document as a whole is to focus on a mid-level >> architecture, and publish detailed descriptions of device operation and >> protocol specifications in separate documents. > > <Pascal> > Point taken, we'll have 15 minutes at 6TiSCH on Tuesday 1PM. > Will you be with us? > </Pascal>
Yes, I plan to attend the 6tisch meeting. >> So 6tisch is proceeding with the design decisions without the DetNet >> architecture in place? I will take another look at draft-ietf-6tisch- >> architecture to see if the split and dependencies between 6tisch and DetNet >> are well-described. > > <Pascal> > There is more in draft-thubert-6tisch-4detnet; maybe we can retrofit some of > that if you find that Archie is lacking in that regard. > </Pascal> OK. >> In my opinion, I think the document should describe what security services >> will be expected from various layers, and how those security services >> interact. Operational details should be published in a separate >> specification. >> >> I realize I haven't asked your question directly...of course, the document >> needs a section on the security architecture. My recommendations would >> be to have a separate section, title "Security Architecture", which describes >> the entire security architecture, which includes the functional requirements >> and services of the join procedure as one component. >> > > Points taken as well. We have security authors in the document. > > Thanks for all! You're welcome; glad to have a continuing discussion. BTW, it's important to hear other input from the WG. - Ralph > > Pascal > _______________________________________________ 6tisch mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch
