Hi,
Here's a summary of the active open issues in GRASP following
IETF 96. Not all of these were listed in the -06 draft.
Comments please! It would be helpful to include the issue number in the Subject.
43. Rapid mode synchronization and negotiation is currently
limited to a single objective for simplicity of design and
implementation. A future consideration is to allow multiple
objectives in rapid mode for greater efficiency.
==> Proposed resolution is to simply include this statement in the main text.
48. Should the Appendix "Capability Analysis of Current
Protocols" be deleted before RFC publication?
==> We got the message from the meeting that we should keep this.
49. Section 3.3.1 should say more about signaling between two
autonomic networks/domains.
==> Proposed resolution is to briefly describe a separate GRASP instance
to allow this without risking the security of the normal GRASP instance.
50. Is Rapid mode limited to on-link only? What happens if first
discovery responder does not support Rapid Mode? (Section 3.3.4,
Section 3.3.5)
==> This is somewhat complicated. The signaling design team will think
about it, but WG input is very welcome.
51. Should flooded objectives have a time-to-live before they are
deleted from the flood cache? And should they be tagged in the
cache with their source locator?
==> Proposed resolution is to note that an objective could contain its own
timestamp or refresh interval data. And yes, cached values should be
tagged with their source.
52. Describe in detail what is allowed and disallowed in an
insecure instance of GRASP.
==> This is at the request of the secure bootstrap and ACP teams. Text
will be proposed.
53. Tune IANA Considerations to support early assignment request.
==> This is not hard, text will be proposed.
Regards
Brian Carpenter
Anima signaling design team
_______________________________________________
Anima mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
