Hi,

Ack.

Should we issue a new version of the document now or wait after the closure of 
the LC?

L.


On 14 Dec. 2012, at 17:27 , Joel M. Halpern <[email protected]> wrote:

> Agreed, your action would be to remove the DDT material from this document.
> The question of how the DDT spec handles having sufficient security 
> discussion is a separate matter.
> 
> Yours,
> Joel
> 
> On 12/14/2012 6:01 AM, Luigi Iannone wrote:
>> Hi Joel,
>> 
>> I've got your point.
>> 
>> Your suggestion is to take out the DDT section and put it in the DDT 
>> document (right?).
>> 
>> For the first part (take it out from this doc) I have no problems. For the 
>> second part (put it in the DDT doc) is up to the DDT authors, according with 
>> their plans for the document.
>> (simplest solution is to cut & paste as it is  ;-) )
>> 
>> ciao
>> 
>> Luigi
>> 
>> 
>> On 13 Dec. 2012, at 17:39 , Joel M. Halpern <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> Thank you for responding to my comments.
>>> With regard to the discussion of MS, ALT, and DDT, it seems to me that 
>>> there are a couple of reasons for splitting DDT out:
>>> 
>>> 1) MS and ALT are already documented, and need better security description. 
>>>  This seems the sensible place to fill that.  IN contrast, the security 
>>> information for DDT can be included in that document.
>>> 
>>> 2) In theory there can be yet other mapping systems.  This document can not 
>>> deal with all future cases.
>>> 
>>> I would like t be able to complete this short term deliverable without 
>>> making it dependent upon a long term deliverable.
>>> 
>>> Yours,
>>> Joel
>>> 
>>> On 12/13/2012 3:27 AM, Luigi Iannone wrote:
>>>>>> I am wondering about the tradeoff of including DDT in this
>>>>>> document.  On the one hand, DDT is where we likely are going.  On
>>>>>> the other hand, including that material will mean that this
>>>>>> document gets an RFC Editor hold until LISP DDT is published.
>>>>>> Would it make more sense to defer the DDT specific section to the
>>>>>> DDT document?
>>>> Another good point but actually goes beyond DDT IMO. If we put ALT
>>>> and MS make sense to me to put DDT as well.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>> 

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

Reply via email to