Re: [Anima] Pete Resnick's No Objection on charter-ietf-anima-00-17: (with COMMENT)

[Pete Resnick <[e-mail]>]

Excellent. Thanks.

pr

On 11/2/14 10:57 AM, Benoit Claise wrote:
> Hi Pete,
>
> Done in the version 20, 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-anima/
>
> Thanks an regards, Benoit
>> On 10/31/14 5:17 AM, Benoit Claise wrote:
>>> Pete,
>>>> 9th paragraph:
>>>>
>>>>     Definition of a discovery functionality for autonomic functions
>>>>
>>>> I don't understand what that means. By "functionality" do you mean
>>>> protocol?
>>>>
>>>> Brian's response: "Definition of a discovery protocol for autonomic
>>>> nodes."
>>> After some more investigation, this was discussed in 
>>> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/anima/current/msg00454.html,
>>>
>>>     1) the choice of the term "functionality" instead of "protocol"
>>>     was used on purpose as to avoid choosing _a priori_ the
>>>     (de)composition in protocol(s). i.e. one _a posteriori_ /
>>>     informed decision will be how to "group" the different
>>>     functionality in one or more protocols (or extension of existing
>>>     ones).
>>>
>>> I thought that Laurent had a valid argument.
>>
>> Then let's take a shot at rewriting it so that it's clear what the 
>> intention is:
>>
>>    The goal of this working group shall be to develop one or more
>>    protocol specifications (or extensions to existing protocols) to
>>    address the following problem areas. These were selected to according
>>    to the analyzed technical gaps in draft-irtf-nmrg-an-gap-analysis:
>>
>>    o Discovery for autonomic nodes
>>
>>    o Negotiation for autonomic nodes
>>       Starting point: draft-jiang-config-negotiation-protocol
>>
>>    o Bootstrapping a trust infrastructure
>>       Starting point: draft-pritikin-bootstrapping-keyinfrastructures
>>
>>    o Separated Autonomic Control Plane
>>       Starting point: draft-behringer-autonomic-control-plane
>>
>> pr

-- 
Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. - [phone]