RE: Suggestions for Consolidation the Specification Documents
"Jim Pinkerton" <[email protected]> Mon, 22 Nov 2004 13:23:38 -0800
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.rddp |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <E6564B8F86852D46A4E98C485FB33B8F0B0D4E2B@WIN-MSG-10.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com> |
I think this path is reasonable. Jim ________________________________ From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Renato Recio Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2004 6:18 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [rddp] Suggestions for Consolidation the Specification Documents Rajiv, It seems to me that each protocol document needs to be able to stand on its own. That is, the reader of a protocol document must get within that document all the normative references that are applicable to that protocol. It seems to me that we had that to some extent in the protocol RDMAP, DDP, and MPA documents, but it was not complete. It seems to me that using the text from my earlier post, titled "RDMAP Security Section", would provide a complete set of normative security references. Additionally, the RDMAP specification would reference "[RDMASEC]" Security draft for all the details and would include a brief informative overview, as described in that same post. However, the normative references do need to be reviewed by the RDDP WG to make sure they are complete. We discussed the above plan at IETF 61's RDDP WG session and there seemed to be general concensus on the approach. Are we all still OK with that? Renato J Recio Chief Architect, eServer I/O IBM Distinguished Engineer Member IBM Academy of Technology Tel 512-838-3685, T/L 678-3685 "Rajiv Das" <[email protected]> "Rajiv Das" <[email protected]> Sent by: [email protected] 11/18/2004 12:42 AM To: <[email protected]> cc: Subject: [rddp] Suggestions for Consolidation the Specification Documents Hi, [This is a repost with modifications] I was just going through all the RDDP Internet Drafts last weekend and I get a feeling that: 1. The Definitions/Glossary section needs to refer to a master copy so that variations are not there. 2. The Security section in all the drafts should refer to the Security draft to reduce redundancy. It's my feeling that the Architecture document should probably provide the backbone, something which is not really self-evident now. The diagram below is intended to show, what I feel can be a reasonable cross-reference scenario. I realize that the reader must get a complete idea of what each document intends to convey without too many references, but the current feeling is like the documents aren't tied together anywhere. I believe a federal structure is the optimum. I feel that with this consolidation, the documents will provide an even better picture of RDDP. |==============| | 1.Concerns | |==============| | V +==============================================+ + 2. ARCHITECTURE + +----------------------------------------------+ + Definitions +<------- +----------------------------------------------+ | + Overview of RDMA/DDP Operations etc. + | +----------------------------------------------+ | + Normative Reference to RDMA Specification + | +----------------------------------------------+ | + Normative Reference to DDP Specification + | +----------------------------------------------+ | + Normative Reference to Security +---- | +----------------------------------------------+ | | + Normative Reference to RDMA Applicablility + | | +==============================================+ | | | | +========================+--------------------------|--| + 3/4/5/6. RDMA/DDP Spec | | | RDMA Appl,Prb St | | |------------------------| | | Norm Ref to Definitions| | |------------------------| | | Norm Ref to Security |-| | |------------------------| | | | Other Contents | | | +========================+ | | | | | | +==============+ | | + 7.Security +<-----------<-----------------------| +==============+ I believe I have got my understanding correct and hope I've been brief :-) ---------------------- Thanks, Rajiv Das Wipro Technologies _______________________________________________ rddp mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rddp _______________________________________________ rddp mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rddp
image001.gif
(image/gif, 105 B) - not displayed
image002.gif
(image/gif, 73 B) - not displayed
image003.gif
(image/gif, 73 B) - not displayed
image004.gif
(image/gif, 73 B) - not displayed