Re: [tcpm] Zaheduzzaman Sarker's Discuss on draft-ietf-tcpm-yang-tcp-07: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

["Scharf, Michael" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Zahed,

Follow-up...

> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > COMMENT:
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> > I have some minor observations, which we might want to address -
> >
> > - Section 3.1 : It is not clear to me what is the difference between a
> > "Global configuration" and "Policies". To me policies can include
> > global configurations that will valid for all the TCP sessions. So, it
> > is not clear is policy is a special case of global configuration or vise verse.
> Also the term "Global"
> > here seems ambiguous. I kind of read that as a global variable
> > definition, still the text need to be clear about the scope of
> > "Global" is self, global to what context?
> 
> Agreed, this terminology may not be perfect. In particular, the term "policy"
> can mean many things. The proposal is to avoid it with the following new
> terms:
> 
> *  System-wide configuration
> 
> *  Interface configuration
> 
> *  Connection parameters
> 
> *  Application preferences
> 
> I hope that this better captures the different cases.
> 
> [ZS] System-wide configuration a bit more clear than Global. I was thinking if
> it is work clarifying the scope of the "System", is this the local host only?
> 
> Application preferences is good.

I can see your point. But as this document is mostly relevant for TCP stack on routers (and similar network elements inside the network), the term "host" may be confusing.

I am looking for a good term for "not-interface-specific". Unfortunately, I haven't found something better than "system-wide", but I am open for other suggestions.

If we don't find another term, I'd probably add a sentence in -09 to better describe the meaning in this specific context.

Michael