Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> The authors seriously believe that this will result in an attempt to
>> >> boil the ocean. Yes, BRSKI is exciting for many and opens many doors,
>> >> but in the context of the *ANIMA* Charter, we strongly think that this
>> >> document should leave the oceans alone, and deal only with the ANIMA
>> >> ACP usage.
>>
>> > Yes, violent agreement. From all the interest outside ANIMA, the basic
>> > idea of BRSKI is a big hit and will be re-used in other contexts. I
>> > think a strong statement about the specific scope of *this* document
>> > belongs in the Abstract and Introduction, with a comment that variant
>> > usages of BRSKI in other scenarios will be documented separately.
>>
>> Brian, these are my proposed changes to the abstract, intro,
>> and adding a section on ACP Applicability. I think that there is
probably
>> more to say there.
> Perhaps, but I think these changes clarify the scope correctly.
My sense in writing the words was that there were more words needed.
But I didn't know what else I could nail down scope-wise, so I stopped.
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
-= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Anima mailing list Anima@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
