Re: Requirement for MN Preference (was: Re: [Seamoby] CAR Discovery Requirements)

Hi James,

two comments:
1) I'd like to have the term CAR changed in GAAR or GAAR/CAR since
a solution  might exchange data of GAARs only while the CARs are determined
locally without distributing any information. In general though, I
appreciate to state the
separation.

2) For the last sentence, the same comment is valid as for the re-use
requirement earlier.
What you state here is a procedure requirement rather than a solution
requirement.
We should keep process and solution requirements separate. Either we put ONE
procedure requirement in the document, outlining exactly this implicit
requirement
explicitly, i.e., to re-use existing protocols wherever possible. That's
what you proposed
earlier (though removing the second sentence in this requirement).
Or we put a description of the solution assessment procedure in the
introduction
as prosa text, stating that solutions will be assessed against the re-use of
functionality and
that the design process has to include an assessment/gap analysis of
existing protocols.
Personally, I'd prefer the second option.

Regards,

Dirk

----- Original Message -----
From: "ext James Kempf" <kempf@docomolabs-usa.com>
To: "Trossen Dirk (NRC/Boston)" <dirk.trossen@nokia.com>; <seamoby@ietf.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 2:49 PM
Subject: Requirement for MN Preference (was: Re: [Seamoby] CAR Discovery
Requirements)

> This requirement is meant for a solution to expressing MN preferences
> without conflating that and routing and capability information
> distribution, requested by Dirk.
>
>     The Seamoby CAR discovery solution MUST provide a means for
>     the MN to transmit its preferences for CARs based on CAR
>     capabilities  to the AR. The MN preference solution SHOULD
>     be logically separate from the CAR information distribution
>     solution in order to maintain separation of security requirements,
>     i.e. it need not be part of the same protocol as that involved
>     in CAR information distribution. Existing protocols, such as AAA,
>     MUST be examined as part the design process.
>
> Comments?
>
>             jak
>
>
>
>
>

_______________________________________________
Seamoby mailing list
Seamoby@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/seamoby