On 21/11/2016 06:36, Michael Behringer (mbehring) wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Michael Richardson [mailto:mcr+i...@sandelman.ca]
>> Sent: 20 November 2016 07:42
>> To: Michael Behringer (mbehring)
>> Cc: anima@ietf.org
>> Subject: Re: [Anima] Intent per ASA or per AF?
>>
>>
>> Mic
> -Original Message-
> From: Michael Richardson [mailto:mcr+i...@sandelman.ca]
> Sent: 20 November 2016 07:42
> To: Michael Behringer (mbehring)
> Cc: anima@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Anima] Intent per ASA or per AF?
>
>
> Michael Behringer (mbehring) wrote:
> > One question that just
Michael Behringer (mbehring) wrote:
> One question that just came up: Should Intent be designed per ASA or
> per AF?
> My suggestion previously was to segment Intent into sections per
> Autonomic Functions.
> Example: Intent for the bootstrap function could be: - allow
>
Max Pritikin (pritikin) wrote:
> Section 3.1.1. Discovery Supports a backoff mechanisms but on review
> I’m thinking the language about final failure to be vague: "Once all
> discovered services are attempted the device SHOULD return to Multicast
> DNS. It should periodically ret