Changes between Version 3 and Version 4 of DraftShepherdWriteupWgRespComplex

Timestamp:

20/09/12 18:20:27 (11 years ago)

Author:

barryleiba@…

Comment:

--

DraftShepherdWriteupWgRespComplex

@@ -6 +6 @@
 This document extends the Lightweight Modular Network Operations Protocol (LMNOP) by adding an option to control optimization of frodiddles when the evil bit is set.  It is proposing the new option as a standard extension to LMNOP.  Some operational experience is needed, and the working group considered making this Experimental, but after an extended discussion and consultation with the AD it was decided that the proposal is solid and PS is appropriate.
 
-There was particular controversy in the discussion of situations involving the evil bit with avian carrier networks.  The consensus on that point was quite rough, and resulted in the text in Section 3.14.  There was also a great deal of discussion about paragraphs 7 and 8 of the Security Considerations, and careful review of those paragraphs is needed.
 
-During document development, one participant built a prototype implementation, and results from that helped shape the document and demonstrate the practicality of some of the questionable points (particularly what's in Sections 4.3 and 4.4).  There's a lot of interest in implementing this after publication -- at least six participants have promised quick roll-out of this extension.
 
 === 2. Review and Consensus ===
+
+There was particular controversy in the discussion of situations involving the evil bit with avian carrier networks.  The consensus on that point was quite rough, and resulted in the text in Section 3.14.  There was also a great deal of discussion about paragraphs 7 and 8 of the Security Considerations, and careful review of those paragraphs is needed.
 
 There was especially active discussion of the first six versions, while the controversial points were nailed down, and most of the active working group participants reviewed at least one of those versions and provided useful comments.  Reviews of versions -06 and beyond have been very light, as those represented minor changes and working group energy moved over to other documents.  There is strong consensus behind the document, with significant grumbling remaining about Section 3.14.
 
 No formal reviews are needed for this, but, as stated above, a security review is needed, with a particular look at paragraphs 7 and 8 of Security Considerations.  The Operations Directorate has reviewed this (changes were made in version -08 based on that), and we have requested an Applications Directorate review.  The shepherd has no other concerns.
+
+During document development, one participant built a prototype implementation, and results from that helped shape the document and demonstrate the practicality of some of the questionable points (particularly what's in Sections 4.3 and 4.4).  There's a lot of interest in implementing this after publication -- at least six participants have promised quick roll-out of this extension.
 
 === 3. Intellectual Property ===