On 03/08/2017 07:46, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Toerless has instead written the M_FLOOD mechanism.
> >> We started a thread a few weeks ago about this... what happened to it,
> I
> >> would have to look. In either case, I would like to please discuss
> this
> >> in the context of the BRSKI document, not the ACP.
>
> > Sure. My understanding was discover/synchronize which is what
> > I put in draft-carpenter-anima-ani-objectives-03 (and in
> > the latest demo code if anyone cares:
> > https://github.com/becarpenter/graspy/blob/master/brski-demo.pdf ).
>
> > But this needs to be a firm consensus in the BRSKI team.
>
> I did take a look at the code yesterday in the end, and I'll like run it
> sometime soon, but I decided I didn't want to reverse engineer the spec from
> the code :-)
>
> >> o a synchronization objective option
>
> > That implies that the registrar has something to announce to
> > the proxy (such as "I support foobar and barfoo").
>
> Do we have some preference for "AN_join_register" (and AN_Proxy and AN_ACP),
> or is the AN_ prefix unwanted?
It's only a name, so we can do what we want. I put the prefix just to mark the
fact that they are ANI components but I have no strong feelings about it.
Brian
_______________________________________________
Anima mailing list
Anima@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
