Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-1--1035031135
From: Tim Bruijnzeels <tim@ripe.net>
In-Reply-To: <041CAC39-1FAE-465F-847B-C8E171CF14EE@kumari.net>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 10:46:43 +0100
Message-Id: <D2E6489B-8BF0-4AFA-A7D6-1013730443EE@ripe.net>
References: <24B20D14B2CD29478C8D5D6E9CBB29F60756D3@Hermes.columbia.ads.sparta.com>
 <041CAC39-1FAE-465F-847B-C8E171CF14EE@kumari.net>
To: Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>
Cc: "Murphy, Sandra" <Sandra.Murphy@sparta.com>,
 "sidr@ietf.org" <sidr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [sidr] WG adoption call for draft-ymbk-rpki-rtr-impl-01.txt
Precedence: list

--Apple-Mail-1--1035031135
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii

Hi,

On Jan 22, 2012, at 11:26 PM, Warren Kumari wrote:
> Comments:
> It is unclear (to me) what exactly was mean by "YES" vs "UNIT TEST" vs =
"SYS TEST" -- I could make some guesses, but a definition would be nice.

Speaking for my contribution; the one that mentions "Unit Test":

Our 'production' implementation is just the validator, so the cache that =
is the server side of the protocol. It is tested using automated unit =
and functional testing as well as interop-testing with different client =
implementations.

We also have test client code that we use for the unit tests. This =
client is able to parse and understand PDUs in the table in section 3, =
but it's not released as a real production stand-alone, interop-tested, =
client. Hence I say "Unit Test". I can live with "Not Applicable" or N/A =
instead though.

I thought it might be useful to mention "unit test", because fwiw we =
don't see problems in the PDU format for these 'client' PDUs.

Tim=

--Apple-Mail-1--1035031135
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset=us-ascii

<html><head></head><body style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; =
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; =
">Hi,<div><br><div><div>On Jan 22, 2012, at 11:26 PM, Warren Kumari =
wrote:</div><blockquote type=3D"cite"><span class=3D"Apple-style-span" =
style=3D"border-collapse: separate; font-family: Helvetica; font-style: =
normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: =
normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; =
text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; =
word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; =
-webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; =
-webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: =
auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; =
">Comments:<br>It is unclear (to me) what exactly was mean by "YES" vs =
"UNIT TEST" vs "SYS TEST" -- I could make some guesses, but a definition =
would be nice.</span></blockquote></div><br><div>Speaking for my =
contribution; the one that mentions "Unit =
Test":</div><div><br></div><div>Our 'production' implementation is just =
the validator, so the cache that is the server side of the protocol. It =
is tested using automated unit and functional testing as well as =
interop-testing with different client =
implementations.</div><div><br></div><div>We also have test client code =
that we use for the unit tests. This client is able to parse and =
understand PDUs in the table in section 3, but it's not released as a =
real production stand-alone, interop-tested, client. Hence I say "Unit =
Test". I can live with "Not Applicable" or N/A instead =
though.</div><div><br></div><div>I thought it might be useful to mention =
"unit test", because fwiw we don't see problems in the PDU format for =
these 'client' =
PDUs.</div></div><div><br></div><div>Tim</div></body></html>=

--Apple-Mail-1--1035031135--