Subject: [mif] comment about draft-mrw-mif-current-practices-01.txt

From: marcelo bagnulo braun <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 21:36:40 +0100

Hi,

This document includes very interesting information about how current 
implementations deal with the different problems.
One suggestion that i think it would help improve the document would be 
to link it more directly to the problems described in the problem 
statement. Of course, we need to decide on one problem statement 
document before, but..

What i mean, is that the problem statement documents describe a set of 
problems, like dealing with DNS issues, default router selection and so 
on and it is not directly obvious from the document in its current form 
how the current implementations deal with the issues. For instance, it 
is not obvious from this document how current implementations deal with 
the dual faced dns issue, which i guess many implementations actually 
handle pretty well.

So, i guess that once we have identified the relevant problems we want 
to work on, in the section for each implementation
it would be good to have a sub section for each of the problems 
identified in the problem statement and describing how the particular 
implementation deals with the particular problem.

Regards, marcelo

---

From: Behcet Sarikaya <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 13:53:14 -0700 (PDT)

Marcelo, 
  I think that this draft tries to do a difficult thing in documenting on OSs with some outside knowledge.
  Also I find Iphone OS which is not exactly Mac OS X covered in Sec. 2.8 is missing and it is very relevant to mif work.

Regards,

Behcet

________________________________
From: marcelo bagnulo braun <[email-masked]>
To: mif <[email-masked]>
Sent: Monday, March 16, 2009 3:36:40 PM
Subject: [mif] comment about draft-mrw-mif-current-practices-01.txt

Hi,

This document includes very interesting information about how current implementations deal with the different problems.
One suggestion that i think it would help improve the document would be to link it more directly to the problems described in the problem statement. Of course, we need to decide on one problem statement document before, but..

What i mean, is that the problem statement documents describe a set of problems, like dealing with DNS issues, default router selection and so on and it is not directly obvious from the document in its current form how the current implementations deal with the issues. For instance, it is not obvious from this document how current implementations deal with the dual faced dns issue, which i guess many implementations actually handle pretty well.

So, i guess that once we have identified the relevant problems we want to work on, in the section for each implementation
it would be good to have a sub section for each of the problems identified in the problem statement and describing how the particular implementation deals with the particular problem.

Regards, marcelo

_______________________________________________
mif mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif

---

From: Margaret Wasserman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 19:30:45 -0400

Hi Behcet,

It would be great to get some information on the iPhone OS if someone  
is able to provide it.  At this point, the information is not  
included, because we don't have it.

Margaret

On Mar 16, 2009, at 4:53 PM, Behcet Sarikaya wrote:

> Marcelo,
>   I think that this draft tries to do a difficult thing in  
> documenting on OSs with some outside knowledge.
>   Also I find Iphone OS which is not exactly Mac OS X covered in  
> Sec. 2.8 is missing and it is very relevant to mif work.
>
> Regards,
>
> Behcet
>
> This document includes very interesting information about how  
> current implementations deal with the different problems.
> One suggestion that i think it would help improve the document would  
> be to link it more directly to the problems described in the problem  
> What i mean, is that the problem statement documents describe a set  
> of problems, like dealing with DNS issues, default router selection  
> and so on and it is not directly obvious from the document in its  
> current form how the current implementations deal with the issues.  
> For instance, it is not obvious from this document how current  
> implementations deal with the dual faced dns issue, which i guess  
> many implementations actually handle pretty well.
>
>
> So, i guess that once we have identified the relevant problems we  
> want to work on, in the section for each implementation
> identified in the problem statement and describing how the  
> particular implementation deals with the particular problem.
>
>
> Regards, marcelo
>