Joe: I will send out version 16 shortly.
Sue -----Original Message----- From: Joe Clarke [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, August 28, 2016 4:33 PM To: Susan Hares; [email protected] Cc: [email protected]; 'Alia Atlas' Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 Week WG LC on draft-ephemeral-state-15.txt (8/2 to 8/15) On 8/28/16 16:20, Susan Hares wrote: > Joe: > > Let's start with the overview, and then go down to words. > > My concern: > The phrasing of this impacts the OPSTATE discussions for Juergen. > Juergen is pushing for ephemeral to just be operational state. Other > drafts are pushing for ephemeral state to be configuration and > ephemeral state. I have suggested a different model in the protocol-strawman for I2RS. > > What is important in this document is to indicate that ephemeral > models have both configuration and operational state. Agreed. > > Words: > > This statement words for me in the beginning of section 3. > /Ephemeral state is defined as potentially including in a data model > ephemeral configuration and operational state which is flagged as > ephemeral./ > > If this works, for you as well - I'll create a version 16. Yes, this works. Joe > > Sue > > -----Original Message----- > From: Joe Clarke [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Sunday, August 28, 2016 4:05 PM > To: Susan Hares; [email protected] > Cc: [email protected]; 'Alia Atlas' > Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 Week WG LC on draft-ephemeral-state-15.txt (8/2 > to > 8/15) > > On 8/28/16 11:35, Susan Hares wrote: >>> I think this is good. A general comment I have is that "ephemeral state" >> is used in a number of places where I think "ephemeral configuration" >> should be used. >This may be a nit, but the device has one state >> that is dictated by the various configuration types and the >> operational state. This was raised in BA in the meetings >as well. >> >>> My recommendation is to replace "ephemeral state" with "ephemeral >>> configuration". It's not a show-stopper the way it is, but I think the >>> latter is a bit clearer. >> >> We had agreed that "ephemeral state" as what is defined in section 3. >> Do you think clarifying this in the text would be better: >> >> Old/Ephemeral state is defined as potentially including both >> ephemeral configured state and operational state. / New/Ephemeral >> state is defined as potentially including in a data model ephemeral >> configuration state and operational state which is flagged as >> ephemeral./ >> >> Without this explicit comment, Juergen did not consider >> Ephemeral-REQ--01 thru Ephemeral-REQ-04 to be specific enough. > > To be clear, I think this is somewhat semantic. A device has one > state that is made of a number of related things. But this > terminology not a stopping thing for me. > > In the new text above, would the following not satisfy Jürgen's comment? > > /Ephemeral state is defined as potentially including in a data model > ephemeral configuration and operational state which is flagged as > ephemeral./ > > Note: I simply drop the second "state" as this seems a bit clearer to > be (i.e., before it stated, essentially, that ephemeral state includes > ephemeral state). > >>> Section 7, bullet 2: This text reads strangely: >>> >>> OLD TEXT: >>> >>> The I2RS protocol MUST support the >>> ability to have data nodes MAY store I2RS client identity and not >>> the effective priority of the I2RS client at the time the data >>> node is stored. >> >>> PROPOSED NEW TEXT: >>> >>> The I2RS protocol MUST support the ability to have data nodes store >>> I2RS >> client identity and not the effective priority of the I2RS client at >>> the time the data node is stored. >> >> Warning: I am re-writing the ephemeral-protocol-security-requirements >> so, the reference in bullet may change. You new text works for me. > > Thanks and understood. > >> Works for me (WFM): The complete sentences would be: >> >> As part of this requirement, the I2SR protocol should support: > > s/I2SR/I2RS/ :-) > >> - multiple operations in one or more messages; though errors in one >> message or operation will have no effect on other messages or >> commands even if they are related. >> - No multi-message commands SHOULD cause errors to be inserted into >> the I2RS ephemeral state. > > Works for me. > >> If you confirm > > Thanks, Sue. > > Joe > > _______________________________________________ > i2rs mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs > _______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
