> I have two concerns about the ILNP docs: > > a) Editorial: I think they perhaps could be re-organised for > additional clarity. In particular, there isn't a single, cohesive > description of ILNP. There are important bits and details spread > over the 4 docs. > > b) Architecture: I have the feeling there are some rather important > questions unanswered (e.g. around state), which should either be > addressed or perhaps noted as being TBD, as you suggest. > > I don't know if these concerns are significant enough that they need to be > addressed before publication as RRG product, given the objectives/constraints > you describe.
Please feel free to work with Ran on these issues. As always, verbatim text contributions are the most constructive way of commenting. Tony _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
