Re: [mile] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-mile-rfc5070-bis-22: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

[Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]>]

Hiya,

Sorry, ball was in my court there. The changes in -25 fix my
issue so I've cleared.

Thanks,
S.

On 07/07/16 01:42, Kathleen Moriarty wrote:
> Roman,
> 
> I'm looking at Stephen's updated discuss and think he may want more on
> the confidence surrounding threat actors and that's reasonable.  Can
> you look at his updated discuss point and respond?  It would be nice
> to wrap this up soon if we can.
> 
> Alissa's discuss remains, so we can follow up on that one next.
> 
> Thanks,
> Kathleen
> 
> On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 5:04 PM, Roman D. Danyliw <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> Hi Stephen!
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Stephen Farrell [mailto:[e-mail]]
>>> Sent: Friday, June 24, 2016 3:15 PM
>>> To: Roman D. Danyliw <[e-mail]>; The IESG <[e-mail]>
>>> Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail];
>>> [e-mail]; [e-mail]; mile-
>>> [e-mail]
>>> Subject: Re: Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-mile-rfc5070-bis-22: (with
>>> DISCUSS and COMMENT)
>>>
>>>
>>> Hiya,
>>>
>>> On 24/06/16 19:22, Roman D. Danyliw wrote:
>>>>>> TBH, I wonder if the right thing here is to say that documents
>>>>>> with ambiguous confidence elements MUST be treated as if the
>>>>>> confidence element were omitted.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Would that work?
>>>> Definitely.  Would this last sentence address your concern:
>>>>
>>>> "... While the sender of the
>>>> document may explicitly convey confidence in the data in a granular
>>>> way using the Confidence class, the recipient is free to ignore or
>>>> refine this information to make its own assessment.
>>>> [start new text]
>>>> Ambiguous Confidence elements in a document MUST be ignored by the
>>> recipient.
>>>> "
>>>>
>>>> It's a restatement of your suggestion to match the existing style of the text.
>>>
>>> That'd work for me. I'd word it more like:
>>>
>>> "Ambiguous Confidence elements (where it is unclear to which of a set
>>> of other elements the Confidence element relates) in a document MUST be
>>> ignored by the recipient."
>>
>> -25 was just posted.  It includes the exact text above.
>>
>> Thanks for your help in improving the draft.
>>
>> Roman
> 
> 
>