[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: draft-jones-opsec-framework-01 comments
On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, George Jones wrote:
In other words, an "ABC" on how to use this effectively for
operator/vendor dialogue, RFPs, or capability/feature documentation.
This seems very reasonable/helpful.
Do you think renaming "examples" something like "implementations"
or "known implementations" would do it ?
If such a section would only describe the implementations we're
For the sake of the clarity for implementors, we'd have to be sure to cite
specific RFC/versions/etc where they exist. How would you suggest dealing
with things that may not be full sandard (e.g. ?NTP?, ?SSHv2?) or that
have options (MAYs, SHOULDs) ?
There's really no help in the case when a stable specification does
not exist. Maybe referring to an internet-draft (if even such exists
which is not guaranteed) is OK..
The options are indeed problematic, but too detailed to cover here;
they should be discussed in the dialogue if needed.
Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings