Re: Inconsistencies of ASAP and ENRP drafts

Walter,

Thanks for the comments.

Johnson Walter-CWJ002 wrote:

> There are many inconsistencies between the two drafts that seemed to surface when the protocols were separated into there own drafts. Will these be merged back together? Or does work need to be done to clean up the separation. I would lobby to combine both into a single consistent document but wanted to see what the group was thinking.

The reason to have separate documents is to better manage the complexity. It was a working 
group decision made a long time ago and I think it worked well. I personally do not have a 
problem with multiple documents (DDDS is published in 4 separate RFCs, for example). As a 
coauthor I will do my best to fix any inconsistencies whenever they are noted and I believe 
other coauthors will do the same. And the text quality will only improve with more comments 
like yours.

> 
> Here are a few of the several problems I have seen.
> 
> 1) The same action is described differently between documents. For instance, Registration is described in both the ENRP and ASAP document differently. The question here should be whether Registration should even be mentioned in ENRP draft since it is a ASAP message.     

As you can guess, one place is normative and the other is informative. We will make this 
more clear. But I disagree that only one document should be allowed to have the description 
since doing that will obviously impair the readability of the document without the description.

> 
> 2) Definitions are inconsistent. For instance, Home ENRP server is defined as follows in the two drafts. This is a noticeable difference in definitions with using "SHOULD only have one" and "MUST only have one". 
> 
> [ASAP] 
> Home ENRP server: The ENRP server to which a Pool Element currently
>       uses.  A PU or PE normally chooses the ENRP server on their local
>       host as the home ENRP server (if one exists).  A PU or PE should
>       only have one home ENRP server at any given time.  Having a "home"
>       ENRP server helps provide a mechanism to minimize the number of
>       associations a given PE will have.
> 
> [ENRP]
> Home ENRP server: The ENRP server to which a PE or PU currently
>       belongs.  A PE MUST only have one home ENRP server at any given
>       time and both the PE and its home ENRP server MUST keep track of
>       this master/slave relationship between them.  A PU SHOULD select
>       one of the available ENRP servers as its home ENRP server, but the
>       ENRP server does not need to know, nor does it need to keep track
>       of this relationship. 

Good catch. Will have this fixed.

regards,
-Qiaobing

> 
> _______________________________________________
> rserpool mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rserpool
>