Subject: [midcom] Protocol eval: 2.1.2 - RSIP - P -> T? (was RE: Proposed changes t o RSIP evaluation ....

From: "Mary Barnes" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2002 14:29:38 -0500

Hi all,

My responses to 2.1.2 from Jim's response to email thread. 

Again, feedback on this is requested from the WG by COB on Tuesday, August
6th.

Regards,
Mary.

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Sunday, August 04, 2002 10:42 PM
To: 'midcom'
Subject: Re: Proposed changes to RSIP evaluation (was RE: [midcom]
Comments on protocol evaluation draft

----text deleted -----
>
> 2.1.2 - The text for this one clearly states that an extension is
> required.
>

This may be a fine point, but the *RSIP framework and semantics* would
require an extension, the *protocol* itself would not (BTW, that's what
the text for the RSIP evaluation of the requirement says: " ... the RSIP
*architecure* could be extended ..." [Emphasis added.]). The extension
would be the explicit removal of an unstated (and usually unimplemented!)
restriction that an RSIP request must come from the host whose
communications would be affected by the request.

[MB] Again, this was one that had been discussed on the mailing list. This
was lowered to a P+ based upon WG mailing list feedback (from more than one
person, actually) on the -00 version of the document.  So, per my summary
email for the changes for -01 (on June 15th), I made this change (and
received no response to that email). 

What I would propose is to open this again for mailing list discussion, to
see if anyone else is in support of changing this to a "T". 
[/MB]

Or looking at it another way, a given installation's policy may be that
RSIP requests must come from the host that is affected. RSIP permits that
policy to be enforced, but it also, through it's silent on the matter,
allows the opposite policy. I could certainly envision both of these
policies with MODCOM, also.

So either way ya look at it, the RSIP documentation should be clarified,
but no change to the protocol is required. I, being the hard grader that
I am and wanting to give the most information on and insight into RSIP
as possible, graded this a P. But with the grading system as I now
understand it, and for consistency with the way the other protocols were
graded, I think that this should be a T.

If replacement text is necessary, I would suggest:

     RSIP allows a client to simultaneously have RSIP sessions with
     multiple RSIP gateways.

----Remainder deleted -----

_______________________________________________
midcom mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/midcom