Subject: [NSIS] Working Group Last Call: Applicability Statement of NSIS Protocols in Mobile Environments

From: Jukka Manner <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2010 13:44:01 +0200

Dear all,

This message starts the Working Group Last Call on the Applicability 
Statement of NSIS Protocols in Mobile Environments.

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-nsis-applicability-mobility-signaling-14.txt

Please review the document and send your comments by Sunday March 7.

Regards,
Jukka

---

From: Al Morton <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2010 16:09:46 -0500

At 06:44 AM 2/20/2010, Jukka Manner wrote:
>...

I remember reading (somewhere) that AS memos should have the
same status as the memo(s) they refer to, which in this case would
be Experimental?

I've searched for my notes about this, with no luck.  The relevant text
in RFC 2026  puts an upper limit the on the AS memo status:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2026#section-3.2
    "...An AS may not have a higher maturity level in the standards track
    than any standards-track TS on which the AS relies..."

We were quite late in sorting-out the status of other NSIS memos,
better to do it now, IMO.

Al

---

From: Jukka Manner <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 09:44:20 +0200

Hi,

Need to ask our AD. The applicability statement does not define 
technical extensions or change the original specs in any way. It just 
shows how and why the protocols actually work with a mobile hosts.

cheers,
Jukka

---

From: Magnus Westerlund <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 10:42:48 +0100

Hi,

Are this really an applicability statement in the RFC 2026 sense? This
document is not intended to SPECIFY how you would use NSIS for mobility
signaling.

>From Section 3.2 of RFC 2026:
>    An Applicability Statement specifies how, and under what
>    circumstances, one or more TSs may be applied to support a particular
>    Internet capability.  An AS may specify uses for TSs that are not
>    Internet Standards, as discussed in Section 7.
> 
>    An AS identifies the relevant TSs and the specific way in which they
>    are to be combined, and may also specify particular values or ranges
>    of TS parameters or subfunctions of a TS protocol that must be
>    implemented.  An AS also specifies the circumstances in which the use
>    of a particular TS is required, recommended, or elective (see section
>    3.3).
>
>    An AS may describe particular methods of using a TS in a restricted
>    "domain of applicability", such as Internet routers, terminal
>    servers, Internet systems that interface to Ethernets, or datagram-
>    based database servers.
> 
>    The broadest type of AS is a comprehensive conformance specification,
>    commonly called a "requirements document", for a particular class of
>    Internet systems, such as Internet routers or Internet hosts.
> 
>    An AS may not have a higher maturity level in the standards track
>    than any standards-track TS on which the AS relies (see section 4.1).
>    For example, a TS at Draft Standard level may be referenced by an AS
>    at the Proposed Standard or Draft Standard level, but not by an AS at
>    the Standard level.

It might be worth changing the title of the document to avoid having
people thinking it is a AS. Remove Statement and add a The before
applicability.

Cheers

Magnus

-- 

Magnus Westerlund

IETF Transport Area Director
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ericsson AB                | Phone  +46 10 7148287
Färögatan 6                | Mobile +46 73 0949079
SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden| mailto: [email-masked]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Jukka Manner <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 12:57:32 +0200

Thanks, Magnus.

Takako, please change the title and probably go through the introduction 
to see if it talks about applicability within the text.

regards,
Jukka