Subject: Response to the "equally capable" Requirments message

From: John Strassner <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 07:00:41 -0800

LDUPers,

this is the third memo, responding to the "equally capable" Requirments 
message. Kurt raises points in this message.

First, Kurt recommends that "...the requirement I-D needs to state that 
"application-level interoperability" will not be guaranteed by the 
protocol, but may be resolvable by applicability statements (profiles).  In 
the end, "application interoperability" requires that all replicas 
implement the same features in the same manner and this, IMO, is beyond the 
scope of LDUP".

Action: this seems very reasonable. Authors, please work with Kurt and 
incorporate an addition to this effect in the requirements I-D.

Second, Kurt notes that the I-D's Security Considerations section says that 
specific issues are being addressed in RFC 2820 (and the work in progress) 
when this is clearly not the case.

Action: Authors, please work with Kurt and fix this.

Finally, Kurt notes that the LDUP specifications can be progressed without 
a Standard Track ACM.

Action: none, this has already been decided.

regards,
John Strassner
Co-Chair, LDUP WG