Re: [Hipsec] Certs draft: experimental or PS

[Ari Keranen <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

I'd go for publishing experimental CERT now and bis'ed PS version later with the rest of the PS HIP stuff.


Cheers,
Ari

On Jan 18, 2011, at 11:36 AM, Gonzalo Camarillo wrote:
> Hi Tobias,
> 
> yes, those are exactly the points that need to be considered. A straight
> forward approach would be to publish this draft as experimental and then
> create a bis draft, this time as a PS, which would reference 5201bis.
> 
> Another possibility is not to publish the experimental draft at all. We
> could update the current draft so that it references 5201bis and publish
> it together with 5201bis.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Gonzalo
> 
> 
> On 18/01/2011 11:13 AM, Tobias Heer wrote:
>> Hello Gonzalo,
>> 
>> Am 17.01.2011 um 14:53 schrieb Gonzalo Camarillo:
>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> in our last charter update, we decided to move the certs draft to the
>>> standards track:
>>> 
>>> o Specify in a standards track RFC how to carry certificates in the
>>> base exchange. This was removed from the base HIP spec so that the
>>> mechanism is specified in a stand-alone spec.
>>> 
>>> However, I would like to double-check with the group. If we intend to
>>> specify all this in 5201 bis anyway, it may make sense to publish this
>>> as an Experimental RFC. If we want 5201bis to reference this spec, then
>>> it needs to be PS. I would like to get your opinions on this issue?
>>> 
>> 
>> I would be interested what the implications of PS or experimetal are for the publication of the draft.
>> 
>> Can we publish the draft as PS with downreferences to RFC5201 now (in absence of a 5201-bis) or would we have to wait until 5201-bis is approved?
>> 
>> If we go experimental, can we bis the cert draft later and go for PS instead?
>> 
>> One reason why I would not like to have the certs in 5201-bis is because it is a separate issue/problem/solution and does not really belong to the _base_ documents but rather extends it. As extension it covers a well defined problem space and can stand on its own.
>> 
>> Tobias
>> 
>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> 
>>> Gonzalo
>>>