Hi, Julien, On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 11:36 AM, Julien Laganier <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Spencer, > > I just realized looking at the IESG record for the draft that I didn't > answer your comment, sorry. > > I don't remember how we ended up with writing this as a SHOULD NOT > (e.g., as opposed to a MUST NOT), but at least the SHOULD NOT does > not negatively affect interoperability since, at the end of the day, > the registrar has the final word, whether it decides to grant a > lifetime that's in the advertised interval, or grant the out-of-bound > lifetime that was requested, and the granted lifetime value is > communicated over to the requester in the REG_RESPONSE. Thanks for the feedback! Spencer > --julien > > On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Spencer Dawkins > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Spencer Dawkins has entered the following ballot position for > > draft-ietf-hip-rfc5203-bis-10: No Objection > > > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > > > > Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria. > html > > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-hip-rfc5203-bis/ > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > COMMENT: > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > This bis draft was an improvement. I did have one question. > > > > I'm trying to visualize why > > > > The registrar indicates the minimum and maximum registration lifetime > > that it is willing to offer to a requester. A requester SHOULD NOT > > request registration with lifetime greater than the maximum > > registration lifetime or smaller than the minimum registration > > lifetime. > > > > is a SHOULD NOT - why would a requester choose to disregard the SHOULD > > and send a request registration with (for example) a lifetime greater > > than the maximum registration lifetime? > > > > Is the intention for the requester to allow this, and then (for example) > > cap the lifetime at the maximum registration lifetime? Or is something > > else supposed to happen? > > > > Whatever the intention is, it might be helpful to provide an explanation > > about that. > > > > >
_______________________________________________ Hipsec mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec
