Re: WG Last call passwd: draft-ietf-tewg-diff-te-reqts-04.txt

[Nabil Seddigh <nseddigh@tropicnetworks.com>]

While this is late, I thought I should at least mention one 
observation re: section 2. The draft states:  "The solution 
must satisfy all the application scenarios described in 
section 2..."

After going through section 2 of the draft more carefully
it appears to me that the 3 scenarios are redundant in terms
of demonstrating that a particular solution satisfies 3
different application requirements. Scenarios 3 deals with 
3 classes, Scenario 2 deals with 2 classes and Scenario
1 deals with 2 classes. 

My suggestion would be to keep scenario 3 and get rid of
the 1st 2 scenarios as they result in redundant text.

Best,
Nabil Seddigh


Ed Kern wrote:
> 
> There was some discussion on this draft during the close of the working
> group last call.  The chairs have discussed the changes and believe that
> the document can be revised with minimal changes to section 3.3.  The
> editors of the document now must incorporate the minimal changes into
> another version of the draft.  After that, it will be forwarded on to the
> IESG.
> 
> This WG document addresses a WG milestone.  It is proposed as an
> Informational RFC.
> 
> Ed & Jim