All,

Here's a summary of the discussions we had in the Berlin F2F regarding the 
solution document:

-          No comments on the currently defined static database discovery. 
Bootstrapping scenarios should however be kept out of the document and included 
into the discovery document instead.

-          No comments on the addition of requestType parameter to support 
ETSI, jcard reference update and prefixing the method names with 
"spectrum.paws.". If anyone has an issue with these, please send asap a note to 
the list, otherwise these will go into the new draft version.

-          Slave device terminology: the current slave device terminology is 
different than the one in RFC6953. Use the terminology from the RFC. Reading 
through the RFC I noticed that the master device terminology is also different 
in the two documents, so please use the one from the RFC, and sync all the 
other applicable terminologies.

-          No objection to the addition of -32700 parse error JSON RPC error 
code

-          No objections to the name change of the Power spectral density

No conclusion on the Spectrum profile encoding, more discussion on the list is 
needed. Vince, could you initiate this discussion on the list, by listing the 
possible encoding options and providing encoding examples. Try to address the 
questions recorded in the minutes too.


-          No objections to adding support for multiple rulesets in a single 
response.  If anyone has an issue with this, please send asap a note to the 
list, otherwise this will go into the new draft version.

-          Wrt the proposal of having the Spectrum_Use_notify be a pure 
notification, ie it would have an HTTP level response, but that response would 
not include a body to be interpreted by the client, there was no objection in 
the room. If anyone has an issue with this, please send asap a note to the 
list, otherwise this will go into the new draft version.

-          I cannot recall any conclusion on the using of JSON-REST encoding, 
we need more discussion on the list.

-          Similarly, no conclusion on whether to use JSON Web Signature for 
non-repudiation. I expects the proponents to continue the discussion on the 
list.

Gabor

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

Reply via email to