[core] Questions on draft-ietf-core-resource-directory-12

Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com> Sun, 01 April 2018 18:37 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf@augustcellars.com>
X-Original-To: core@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: core@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6192F120454; Sun, 1 Apr 2018 11:37:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.911
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.911 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id K0vb-Nsq7maG; Sun, 1 Apr 2018 11:37:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail2.augustcellars.com (augustcellars.com [50.45.239.150]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7C056126BF0; Sun, 1 Apr 2018 11:37:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Jude (73.180.8.170) by mail2.augustcellars.com (192.168.0.56) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1347.2; Sun, 1 Apr 2018 11:35:31 -0700
From: Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com>
To: draft-ietf-core-resource-directory@ietf.org
CC: 'core' <core@ietf.org>
Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2018 11:37:39 -0700
Message-ID: <053601d3c9e8$84da96f0$8e8fc4d0$@augustcellars.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Thread-Index: AdNVlUeSaSytAQ/PQfuysn69+VtrlA==
Content-Language: en-us
X-Originating-IP: [73.180.8.170]
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/core/5Z1521P5KGbOAjEja_6xjTkmneY>
Subject: [core] Questions on draft-ietf-core-resource-directory-12
X-BeenThere: core@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Constrained RESTful Environments \(CoRE\) Working Group list" <core.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/core>, <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/core/>
List-Post: <mailto:core@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/core>, <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2018 18:37:50 -0000

Here are some more questions on the document.

1.  The registration text in section 5.3 says that the interface is
idempotent, however it is not clear to me just how idempotent this is
supposed to be.  It is obvious that the goal is to make sure that a
different resource is not created, however I am not clear what is supposed
to happen with some of the parameters such as the 'lt' parameter.  One way
to implement this is to just make it a POST to the previously existing
resource which would inherit old attributes on the endpoint.  The other way
is to say we are going to create a new resource, it just has the same
address.  It is not clear which, if any, of these two methods is to be used.

Never mind I found the answer to this one.  Need to think if I want clearer
language.

2.  When doing an endpoint lookup, I assume that the 'lt' parameter would be
the same as the one registered at creation.  Is there/should there be a
parameter which is a TTL value?

3.  How are href comparisons done.  
	a) compare against what was registered
	b) Resolve what was registered and the href in the current context
and compare
	c) something I did not think of

4.  compare on group for remote endpoint.  Should this do the remote lookup
or can it just be ignored for attribute comparison

5.  Value of lt = should it be the set parameter or the time left - how
would time left be represented outherwise - should it be represented.

6.  Inferred context based on source IP when an update is done.  If no con
is provided, is that supposed to be checked again to see if it is "right"?
Only if we did the infer to begin with?

7.  I don't understand the presence of the content-format for the empty
message posted for simple registration.  This seems to be odd if the content
is empty.

8  Is there supposed to be a way for simple registration to return an error
message?  As written this is not necessarily done.  Specifically, the
response to the post can be executed before the query to /.well-known/core
is done and the registration is attempted.