Terry: 

Before I respond in depth, did you read my responses to Alvaro?  If so, please 
let me know specific issue that was not addressed.   If something makes you 
"uneasy", please let me know - it may help us now and in future work. 

The intent is to consider the whole routing system (loads, stress, and others) 
as we design in data models and protocols--- Thus our intent is to make 
addition "safe" to add by careful engineering toward protocol performance (E.g. 
publication/subscription mechanisms handling of large data and events) and data 
model design (for actions, updates and down load).   5 requirement drafts for 
the protocol  (ephemeral state, publication/subscription, protocol security, 
traceability, data flow requirements) and 1 for the system (security 
environment). 

 
Sue 

-----Original Message-----
From: Terry Manderson [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2016 1:26 AM
To: The IESG
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; 
[email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Terry Manderson's No Objection on draft-ietf-i2rs-architecture-13: 
(with COMMENT)

Terry Manderson has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-i2rs-architecture-13: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email 
addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory 
paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-i2rs-architecture/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi there,

Firstly, I support Alvaro's two significant comments, especially with regards 
to the outcomes of the I2RS initiated change. My reading of the draft is that 
the resulting architecture espouses to judge intent, or the very least the 
outcome of the intent, as safe. How? Apologies if I read more into this than 
intended, please help clarify.

I only saw one nit that hadn't been noticed in other comments.
Section 3: para, last sentence. "may may"

Thanks



_______________________________________________
i2rs mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs

Reply via email to