Hi,
I am mainly OK with this draft, but I see two sentences that bother me:
At the end of section 6.1.1:
Defining discovery extensions is out of scope of this document. This may be
provided in [I-D.ietf-anima-brski-discovery].
At the beginning of section 6.1.2:
A more general discovery mechanism, also supporting GRASP besides DNS-SD with
mDNS, may be provided in [I-D.ietf-anima-brski-discovery].
I don't understand the words "may be provided". The reference is listed as Informative,
but it isn't clear to me what "may" means, since it is an ambiguous word in English. Does
it mean that the authors of brski-discovery haven't decided yet, that the mechanisms defined in
brski-discovery are OPTIONAL, or something else?
Possibly these two rewrites are what the authors intended to say:
Defining discovery extensions is out of scope of this document. For further
discussion, see [I-D.ietf-anima-brski-discovery].
A more general discovery mechanism, also supporting GRASP besides DNS-SD with
mDNS, is discussed in [I-D.ietf-anima-brski-discovery].
I also wonder whether the Informative reference is correct, since
brski-discovery is also standards track. Do we really want brski-prm to be
published with the reference pointing to an I-D rather than to an RFC?
Regards
Brian Carpenter
On 14-Aug-24 20:10, Toerless Eckert wrote:
[resending, recipient list got messed up, sorry]
Dear ANIMA-WG
I am hereby want to do a lightweight last call to the WG before moving
draft-ietf-anima-brski-prm-14 to our AD, Mahesh.
draft-ietf-anima-brski-prm-06 successfully finished WGLC in early 2023.
The editorial feedback from the WG lead to updates finished around
draft-ietf-anima-brski-prm-11.
Afterwards, Matthias Kovatsch did a very thorough shepherd review whose
editorial
feedback was incorporated up to the curent version,
draft-ietf-anima-brski-prm-14.
I am positive that all those who did provide feedback during WGLC did check that
their feedback was correctly addressed, i know mine and Matthias (Shepherds)
feedback
has been addressed. Likewise, testing with prototypes has successfully been done
since WGLC.
Neither WGLC feedback nor shepherd review did introduce any functional changes
to the
protocol, but of course, the amount of restructuring and and editorial
improvements to the text
is substantial, and this is why Mahesh asked us at IETF120 to check before
taking over.
Therefore i would like to give the WG a last opportunity to raise issues.
If no substantial issues are raised, i will pass on the draft to our AD on
08/23/2024 (end of next week).
Thank you so much to everybody who helped to create this work!
Toerless - for the chairs.
On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 04:20:05PM +0000, Fries, Steffen wrote:
Hi Sheng,
I will provide an updated version by tomorrow, incorporating the proposed
changes.
Best regards
Steffen
-----Original Message-----
From: Sheng Jiang <[email protected]>
Sent: Montag, 20. Februar 2023 04:42
To: anima <[email protected]>; Toerless Eckert <[email protected]>; anima-chairs
<[email protected]>; draft-ietf-anima-brski-prm <draft-ietf-anima-brski-
[email protected]>; ietf <[email protected]>
Cc: ietf <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: WGLC for draft-ietf-anima-brski-prm-06, ends Feb. 15th, 2023
During the WGLC period, this drafts has received no objections, but comments.
Therefore, the chairs would draw on a passed conclusion . The WG discussed the
authors' suggestion that move the YANG components of this to rfc8366bis and
reach the consensus to respect the authors' choice. The authors please submit
an update version. Then, the document shepherd can move it forward.
Regards,
--------------
Sheng Jiang
Dear ANIMAers,
This message starts the two-week (*) ANIMA Working Group Last Call to
advance draft-ietf-anima-brski-prm-06, which specifies enhancements to BRSKI
(RFC8995) to facilitate bootstrapping in domains featuring no or only time
limited connectivity between a pledge and the domain registrar. This
document's intended status is Standards Track. At present, there is no IPR filed
against this document. This document has been ANIMA WG document since
October, 2021 and has received a lot of feedback from the WG and work from
its authors. The authors therefore think is ready for WGLC. Please send your
comments by Feb. 15th 2023. If you do not feel this document should advance,
please state your reasons why. Matthias Kovatsch is the assgined
document shepherd.
Regards,
Sheng
_______________________________________________
Anima mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
_______________________________________________
Anima mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
