Subject: [Nea] Comments on Section 6 - Use Cases

From: "Susan Thomson \(sethomso\)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 12:00:46 -0400

General comment:

I think "less is more" in this section particularly. There is detail in
the examples that does not impact the protocol requirements. There is
also a lot of duplication. 

I would suggest trying to collapse this into a single general flow. The
flow can be generalized to accommodate either the client or the server
establishing the PT connection (e.g. the first bullet in the flow could
be "the PT client or PT server establish a PT connection), and the
presence or lack of assertion attributes (i.e. the flow could indicate
that posture and/or assertion attributes can be returned).

Examples of events that might trigger a PT connection being established
from either client or server end can be summarized upfront as they are
to a large extent already. Examples of conditions under which different
types of attributes might be used can also be summarized. 

Other suggestions/edits for the flow:
- It should be indicated that the posture request/response exchange
could be a multi-step process
- Ensure that flow is not specific to any choice of PT e.g. PTC in
diagram should not be shown as requesting access. This is not the role
of the PTC component as defined.

_______________________________________________
Nea mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nea