[Dots] on cyclical normative dependencies

Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu> Thu, 28 March 2019 10:11 UTC

Return-Path: <kaduk@mit.edu>
X-Original-To: dots@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dots@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C946012028B for <dots@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Mar 2019 03:11:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 8Vak5Cu1LP98 for <dots@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Mar 2019 03:11:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (outgoing-auth-1.mit.edu [18.9.28.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CFC17120271 for <dots@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Mar 2019 03:11:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from kduck.mit.edu (24-107-191-124.dhcp.stls.mo.charter.com [24.107.191.124]) (authenticated bits=56) (User authenticated as kaduk@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.4) with ESMTP id x2SABIpj002977 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for <dots@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Mar 2019 06:11:20 -0400
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2019 05:11:18 -0500
From: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
To: dots@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20190328101118.GJ67070@kduck.mit.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dots/oCDhMGDIWXjdThYuS7ECi-P_Ono>
Subject: [Dots] on cyclical normative dependencies
X-BeenThere: dots@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "List for discussion of DDoS Open Threat Signaling \(DOTS\) technology and directions." <dots.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dots>, <mailto:dots-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dots/>
List-Post: <mailto:dots@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dots-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dots>, <mailto:dots-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2019 10:11:26 -0000

During the session today, Med mentioned at the mic that if we moved the
content from draft-nishizuka-dots-signal-control-filtering into the signal
channel document, then we would have a normative dependency from the signal
channel on the data channel (and the data channel already depends
normatively on the signal channel), as if this would be problematic.

I don't think this is inherentely problematic, as it just means that the
two documents will advance together as a group.  It's still a useful tool
to be able to separate the content out into logically separate documents
even if they are interdependent and in some sense must be considered
together as a consolidated group.  We see this pattern occur regularly in
the IETF, and it's not worrisome.

So I don't think that the cyclical dependency is a reason to leave
signal-control-filtering as a separate document (but I do agree with the
sentiment in the room that we may want to let this document settle in for a
while before we decide that we're happy with it), but given the trend of
the discussion it didn't seem worth spending the time to say it at the
microphone.

-Ben