After integrating the outstanding consensus points into account for the -23 
draft, Marc and I spent a couple of hours looking at the various IESG input.

It's not promising. I'm currently tracking 188 "Discuss" points.

Some of these are simple typos. Some are requests for rewording for clarity. 
One is a request to include Mary Barnes' GEN-ART review feedback, which I 
haven't looked at but expect it includes a few hundred changes.

By far the most troubling are the recurrent views that the document needs to be 
re-structured for clarity, probably with a clean demarc between the base 
protocol and the topology plugins like Chord.  One shouldn't have to understand 
Chord or even the princpals of a DHT for the base document to make sense.

The ADs would apparently also like to see a clean "high level" view of the 
architecture and principals of operation, with dives into protocol 
specification, security consideration, and OAMP.  And maybe see it split into a 
couple of smaller documents.

--
Dean
_______________________________________________
P2PSIP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip

Reply via email to