Subject: Re: [Anima] review of draft-jiang-config-negotiation-protocol-02

From: Randy Presuhn <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2014 12:35:13 -0700 (GMT-07:00)

Hi -

>From: Rene Struik <[email-masked]>
>Sent: Sep 17, 2014 12:14 PM
>To: "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>
>Subject: [Anima] review of draft-jiang-config-negotiation-protocol-02
...
>a) Rather than having a negotiation protocol between two devices, one 
>might as well use a synchronization protocol instead, where both devices 
>synchronize information of
>mutual interest. If one device does not have current info, this 
>automatically could result in pushing the lacking info onto the device.
...

"Synchronization" seems rather more limited than "negotiation."
"Most current" is only one of many factors that might be used
in a distributed decision about which parameter values / options
to employ.

Randy

---

From: Rene Struik <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2014 16:07:40 -0400

Hi Randy:

Perhaps at first sight, but not necessarily upon closer inspection. 
Please feel free to challenge me in terms of converting a negotiation 
protocol of your choice into a specific instantiation of a generic 
synchronization scheme (assuming I understand the details of your 
challenge).

No matter interpretation aspects of wording, there seems to be a need 
for a generic (mutual) synchronization scheme, something I would like to 
be in the SoW.

I can imagine the remaining few pages of my review of the 
config-negotiation-protocol-2 takes some time; nevertheless, indeed, 
doing the above exercise would have some merit by itself.

Best regards, Rene

On 9/17/2014 3:35 PM, Randy Presuhn wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> Anima mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima

-- 
email: [email-masked] | Skype: rstruik
cell: +1 (647) 867-5658 | US: +1 (415) 690-7363

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2014 08:24:18 +1200

I would expect that synchronisation could be implemented as
a special case of negotiation. The opposite is fairly clearly
not true.

Regards
   Brian