Subject: [Dots] Message types, sub-types, etc. (was Re: [tsvwg] Best transport selection during an attack?)

From: "Roland Dobbins" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2015 19:38:20 +0900

[eliding tsvwg]

On 5 Nov 2015, at 19:02, Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy) wrote:

> We will update the draft to explain response codes and re-name SOS to 
> 'Mitigation service request'.

We need to ensure that we capture the requirements for message types, 
codes, et. al. as part of the requirements draft, IMHO.  That can then 
inform the other drafts.

Registration, re-registration, de-registration, heartbeat, capabilities 
exchange (both for messaging and mitigation), mitigation service 
initiation request, mitigation service initiation response, mitigation 
service status notification, mitigation scope update, mitigation 
efficacy notification, mitigation service termination request, 
mitigation service termination response, mitigation service termination 
notification - these are some which spring immediately to mind (we can 
work on the terminology, these are just functional categories).

-----------------------------------
Roland Dobbins <[email-masked]>

---

From: Roland Dobbins <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2015 11:37:12 +0900

On Nov 5, 2015, at 7:38 PM, Roland Dobbins <[email-masked]> wrote:

> these are just functional categories)

btw, these aren't meant to be prescriptive, just strawman examples.   They shouldn't be interpreted as a design statement.