>From conversation with authors, answers below
>I would expect that adding a new PDU would be a new document, not a revision
>to the
>protocol document. Would you agree?
Answer: depends on the PDU
>Is somebody already on board to provide that new draft?
I missed the import of the following captured in the minutes:
Steve Kent: As an author, we can fix this
Answer: "yes".
--Sandy
________________________________________
From: Murphy, Sandra
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2014 1:12 PM
To: Rob Austein
Cc: [email protected]; Randy Bush
Subject: RE: [sidr] Updates to rpki-rtr protocol (RFC 6810 bis)
So the draft does two things - adds a new PDU and makes some changes to the
overall protocol function.
I would expect that adding a new PDU would be a new document, not a revision to
the protocol document. Would you agree?
Since you are changing the protocol function anyway, I can see the efficiency
in making the changes together. Of course, if there's agreement about one part
and not about the other, there's some fate sharing. Comment?
The new PDU assumes the wg agrees to the revision of the router cert draft.
Correct? So this is tied to progress of a revised router cert draft? Is
somebody already on board to provide that new draft?
--Sandy
_______________________________________________
sidr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
