[tcpinc] Consensus call: questions posed at the Berlin session

[Kyle Rose <[e-mail]>]

Here is a list of questions posed at the Berlin session, along with the
rough consensus established among those in the room. Please respond to each
by number if you were not in attendance and have an opinion, especially if
that differs from the meeting consensus, indicated by a * after each
question.


TCP-ENO

1. Eliminate the m bit for now and replace it with another z bit? (The
intention is that the m bit will be defined by a later draft that makes use
of it.) Y*/N

2. Eliminate length word for ENO suboptions (restricting all but the last
suboption to 32 bytes of data)? Y*/N

3. Change "spec" to "TCPINC Encryption Protocol", and use "TEP" as acronym?
Y*/N

4. Add RFC-5705-like key exporter mechanism? Y/N*


tcpcrypt

5. Encrypt frame lengths? Y/N*

** The next question was a bit muddied, so I have separated it into two
questions:

6a. Add a separate API document for tcpcrypt? Y/N*
6b. Move API description in tcpcrypt draft to a separate section of the ENO
API draft? Y*/N


If there is substantive disagreement on any of these questions, we will
pose the question again separately and ask for a re-establishment of rough
consensus among all interested parties.

Please try to respond by Monday, August 1.

Thanks,
Kyle