Subject: Re: [rrg] ILNP

From: RJ Atkinson <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2010 15:49:15 -0400

From a security perspective, Tony's analysis seems quite correct.
I'm obliged to him for the speedy response, as I'm not able to
read the RRG list every day.

Also, Xiao-Hu's question is one that has come up before and 
been answered in one of our papers (I will go try to hunt down 
the correct paper so I can provide a more specific pointer.).

Dae Young has already found at least one other place where the 
ILNP I-D wording is confusing.  So, the likely thing is that 
my words in my Internet-Draft(s) are confusing on this topic,
and need to be edited to make the engineering details more clear
to everyone.  (For the record, it is totally believable that 
there are additional areas where the I-Ds are not crystal clear,
and I welcome input on which places in which drafts might need
editorial work.)

I'll try to work on that in coming days (both finding the existing
description and also trying to edit in clarity to the areas
of the I-Ds that have been identified as confusing).  Sadly,
I'm in meetings most of this week, so it will likely take me
a few days to sort things out.

Sorry for my delayed response.

Yours,

Ran