At 1:23 PM +1000 5/19/10, Geoff Huston wrote:
Hi Steve,
Thank you indeed for this note, and thank you for your review of the
earlier version of this WG draft. As this is WG business, my strong
preference is that such interchange occurs openly on the WG mailing
list, and that the WG has the opportunity to review these proposed
edits to WG documents and chime in if they agree or disagree with
the proposed edits.
I understand from a private mail exchange that you have no objection
to my forwarding your note and this response to the SIDR WG Mailing
list, and that you have no objection to my invitation to other WG
participants to review your proposed amendments to the draft and
offer their comments as well.
kind regards,
Geoff
Geoff,
One additional thought about the document came to mind after I forwarded the
edited version to you:
The discussion of a local cache seems to imply that an RP will need
to have URLs for the repository root(s), to start the retrieval
process. I concur, but think this should be made more explicit in
that discussion. It seems likely to me that these URLs would be
extracted from self-signed certs associated with one or more TAs, but
that is not mentioned either. A brief discussion of how an RP is
expected to acquire the starting point URLs seems appropriate.
Steve
_______________________________________________
sidr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
