Re: [Anima-bootstrap] peer and domain [was BRSKI State Machine]

["Max Pritikin (pritikin)" <[e-mail]>]

> On Oct 17, 2016, at 5:18 PM, Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 18/10/2016 12:05, Max Pritikin (pritikin) wrote:
> ...
>>> - I think we need to bring out more strongly that the state machine needs to track peer and domain. Because, if there is a failure, the pledge should, depending on the failure of course, not try the same domain again, and probably not the same peer either. This isn't coming out today. 
>>> In fact, this is why I liked the "adjacency table" so much that I presented in Berlin (and before): Because there you see much clearer that, if enrolment fails with peer x, you may just move to the next one. As mentioned it's all there, but to a new reader this won't come out clearly, I'm afraid.
>> 
>> Yeah, I can see your point that this is buried in the text of 3.1.1 where it is implied that there is a list of "services returned during each query” and in failure the list processing "picks up where it left off” but thats pretty subtle. 
> 
> What exactly is the "peer" in the above text? I tend to assume it's the proxy.
> In that case it seems to me that the discovery process (whether it's mDNS
> or GRASP) will discover all available proxies regardless of domain. And then
> try them in some order of preference TBD.

Agreed. From the perspective of a Pledge new device anything discovered is a “proxy” or perhaps a registrar but it doesn’t yet know the domain(s). 
> 
> Also, all of this needs to work in the absence of an ACP and therefore
> of the ACP's adjacency table. That applies to GRASP too, because in order
> to perform its various link-local actions, it needs to know which interfaces
> it has and which link-local addresses it has. And it learns of its link-local
> neighbors as a result of discovery. So while I fully appreciate the value
> of the adjacency table, we need to be functional without it.

Michael things of discovered proxies as adjacencies for the table. I think of them as a “list of discovered proxies”. The concepts are similar and Michael is correct that the current sentence could be clearer.

- max

> 
> Rgds
>    Brian
> 
>