Subject: [Anima] I-D Action: draft-ietf-anima-grasp-10.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2017 18:52:12 -0800

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Autonomic Networking Integrated Model and Approach of the IETF.

        Title           : A Generic Autonomic Signaling Protocol (GRASP)
        Authors         : Carsten Bormann
                          Brian Carpenter
                          Bing Liu
	Filename        : draft-ietf-anima-grasp-10.txt
	Pages           : 77
	Date            : 2017-03-09

Abstract:
   This document establishes requirements for a signaling protocol that
   enables autonomic nodes and autonomic service agents to dynamically
   discover peers, to synchronize state with them, and to negotiate
   parameter settings with them.  The document then defines a general
   protocol for discovery, synchronization and negotiation, while the
   technical objectives for specific scenarios are to be described in
   separate documents.  An Appendix briefly discusses existing protocols
   with comparable features.

The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-anima-grasp/

There's also a htmlized version available at:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-anima-grasp-10

A diff from the previous version is available at:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-anima-grasp-10

Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 16:02:15 +1300

Hi,

This version tries to address numerous IETF Last Call comments,
including a lot of editorial changes including clarifications
and minor reorganization. The real technical changes are these:

 Protocol change: Specify that an objective with no initial value
 should have its value field set to CBOR 'null'.

 Protocol change: Specify behavior on receiving unrecognized message
 type.

 Noted that UTF-8 objective names are matched byte-for-byte.

 Added brief guidance for Expert Reviewer of new generic objectives.

The open issues that we need to discuss in Chicago are:

63.  Should encryption be MUST instead of SHOULD in Section 3.5.1
     and Section 3.5.2.1?

64.  Should more security text be moved from the main text into
     the Security Considerations?

65.  Do we need to formally restrict Unicode characters allowed in
     objective names?

66.  Split requirements into separate document?

67.  Remove normative dependency on draft-greevenbosch-appsawg-
     cbor-cddl?

Brian + co-authors

On 10/03/2017 15:52, [email-masked] wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> I-D-Announce mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce
> Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
> or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt
>