On 03/28/2013 02:44 PM, Sebastian Kiesel wrote:
Vijay, all,
sorry for starting or contributing to side tracks.
Sebastian: No worries. I think individually you all are contributing
to the benefit of the protocol, but collectively, it is time to
understand and document the design decisions so we can get the first
version of the protocol out the door.
This is not to say that we want to shortchange anything, but I
think as a group we need to keep in mind the principle of Occam's Razor,
if for nothing else than to guide us towards simplicity at this stage.
Change process is built into the IETF model, so I suspect we can
incrementally make the protocol better even after its issuance as an
initial RFC.
This all started with the question whether the ALTO protocol is
exceptionally vulnerable to DoS attacks. I don't think so. Even
though there is potential for optimizations, the spec IMO can remain
as it is.
Thanks for understanding.
Cheers,
- vijay
--
Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent
1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA)
Email: vkg@{bell-labs.com,acm.org} / [email protected]
Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/
_______________________________________________
alto mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
