Brian E Carpenter <[email protected]> wrote:
    > On the one hand, you haven't fixed the syntax error that I
    > pointed out in the flooded objective "AN_proxy".

Oops.  I forgot about that part.
Let me Mail_FLOOD some replacement text tomorrow.

    > On the other hand, you've changed the discovered objective
    > "AN_join_registrar" into a flooded objective. I thought that
    > the BRSKI team had decided against that? I don't care,
    > either way will work, but I'm a bit surprised.

    > The flooded version seems to be correctly defined, unlike
    > "AN_proxy".

That's good to know so that I know how to fix AN_proxy.

    > (Also, I thought you want to shorten its name to "AN_registrar",
    > but that is a detail.)

We have discussed the possibility that not all (EST) registrars would want to
handle join traffic, and so there might be an AN_registrar objective for use
to renew certificates, etc. once the node has joined.

--
Michael Richardson <[email protected]>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
Anima mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima

Reply via email to