Subject: [Mobike] D113 Design draft, overall comments

From: Tero Kivinen <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 20:08:22 +0200

[issue list: http://www.kivinen.iki.fi/ietf/mobike-design-issues.html
 working copy of document:
 http://www.kivinen.iki.fi/ietf/draft-ietf-mobike-design-06.txt]

[email-masked] writes:
> - My first impression is that the document probably isn't very easy 
>   to read for someone who hasn't followed the design discussions. 
>   But I don't know what exactly should be done to help this, 
>   and perhaps it's not even that important.

I did receive comments from here in the office, that reading this
document at the same time as reading protocol document, made the
protocol document much clearer. Didn't really ask if the other way was
true also, but I would guess it is same in both directions. This is
more abstract and gives background, and the protocol document gives
information how the protocol looks like.

> - The document should probably more explicitly say that the scope 
>   is the design of draft-ietf-mobike-protocol, not any other work 
>   items that MOBIKE WG may decide to work on.

I think Jari already removed most of the references to the other
works... :-)

> - There's some overlap in the general background/motivation text
>   and scenarios (sections 1 and 3) with draft-ietf-mobike-protocol.
>   Perhaps it would be easier to say that this document is meant 
>   to be read with draft-ietf-mobike-protocol, not alone.

I think you can read either one of mobike documents alone, but it is
easier to read if you read both of them at the same time, regardless
whether you are interested in the bits on the wire (protocol document)
or the design and background (this document). 

> - I'd suggest placing all instances of MAY/SHOULD/MUST etc. in 
>   quotes (or changing them to lowercase) to show that we're just 
>   describing that e.g. we decided to add this requirement in the 
>   protocol, but this document itself is not imposing any 
>   requirements for anyone.

All cases where there is MAY/SHOULD/MUST here it is actually refering
to the IKEv2 or protocol document text. I.e. when we decided to change
SHOULD of the IKEv2 document to MUST NOT in the protocol document we
do mention MUST NOT here (this is actually mentioned 3 times in
different places).

Only SHOULD is where it tells that IKEv2 says SHOULD in that place...

The only MAY is where it tells what WG decided on issue 6... 
-- 
[email-masked]
_______________________________________________
Mobike mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.machshav.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mobike