RE: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing
<john.loughney@nokia.com> Tue, 18 January 2005 10:45 UTC
Envelope-to: shim6-data@psg.com
Delivery-date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 10:47:40 +0000
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 12:45:04 +0200
Message-ID: <FBA7FB88A51E804BA4A111CDFD2DE638089CFB@esebe105.NOE.Nokia.com>
Thread-Topic: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing
Thread-Index: AcT9Q4tDmcm0E1IVRjWMzY47bWOuyAABQ3Jw
From: john.loughney@nokia.com
To: kurtis@kurtis.pp.se, shim6@psg.com
Kurtis, > On 2005-01-17, at 13.52, <john.loughney@nokia.com> wrote: >> Could I suggest a change to the current charter: >> >> From: >> >> MAY 05 First draft of architectural and protocol document >> MAY 05 First draft on cryptographic locators, if required >> MAY 05 First draft on state managment >> >> To: >> >> MAY 05 First draft of architectural and protocol document >> MAY 05 First draft on cryptographic locators, if required >> MAY 05 First draft on failure & rehoming event description >> >> This is, of course, not considering the discussion we have had about >> the >> potential need for a seperate architecture draft. >> >> Anyhow, State management to me, means the internal protocol state, and >> message processing rules, etc. For example, I think >> draft-arkko-multi6dt-failure-detection-00.txt might cover some of what >> I'm thinking about. I also wonder if any of the work in DNA could >> also be referenced here. I'm definately interested in contributing >> on this topic. > > so having thought a bit on this, and started working on an updated > version of the charter. I originally put in the state machine document > to have the entire document set somewhat more "modular", but also > because I thought that making an conscious effort to try and develop > the statemachine. After reading the mails here, Johns mail on the > "interaction" with transport made me think that having these as to > separate documents probably is a good idea - as we might want to change > state interaction with transport without changing protocol elements. > > As for the proposal above to change the name, isn't failure and > rehoming also somewhat misleading as sate is also establishment and > disconnect (I guess also somewhat along what Marcelo pointed to)? > > I am for keeping this as a separate document, but I am open for > suggestions on names. I will try and write some more text explaining > the context/content of the document.... I cannot think of a good term - in the initial charter, I interpreted state to be internal protocol state; but there are a lot of other related types of state that the seperate document should cover, in my opinion. John
- Re: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing Kurt Erik Lindqvist
- Re: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing marcelo bagnulo braun
- RE: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing john.loughney
- Re: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing Brian E Carpenter
- RE: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing john.loughney
- Re: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing John Loughney
- Re: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing Thierry Ernst
- Re: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing marcelo bagnulo braun
- RE: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing Christian Huitema
- Re: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing Erik Nordmark
- Re: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing marcelo bagnulo braun
- Re: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing marcelo bagnulo braun
- Re: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing Jari Arkko
- RE: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing john.loughney
- RE: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing john.loughney
- Re: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing Jari Arkko
- Re: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing Jari Arkko
- Re: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing Jari Arkko
- Re: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing Jari Arkko
- Re: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing Brian E Carpenter
- RE: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing john.loughney
- Re: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing marcelo bagnulo braun
- Re: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing Brian E Carpenter
- Re: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing marcelo bagnulo braun
- Re: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing Brian E Carpenter
- RE: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing john.loughney
- Re: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing marcelo bagnulo braun
- Re: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing marcelo bagnulo braun
- Re: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing Brian E Carpenter
- Re: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing Brian E Carpenter
- Re: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing Brian E Carpenter
- RE: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing john.loughney
- Re: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing marcelo bagnulo braun
- Re: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing Kurt Erik Lindqvist
- RE: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing john.loughney
- RE: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing john.loughney
- Re: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing marcelo bagnulo braun
- Re: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing marcelo bagnulo braun
- RE: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing john.loughney
- Re: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing Kurt Erik Lindqvist
- RE: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing john.loughney
- Re: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing Brian E Carpenter
- RE: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing john.loughney