Subject: [midcom] Ownership and state requirements

From: "Shai Mohaban" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 23:10:15 -0700

There seem to be a couple of requirements on Scott's list which still go
well into implementation details. I am specifically talking about some of
the requirements dealing with ownership and states including R5
(ownership/reference counter), R3b (multiple agents manipulating the same
middlebox resource), R59 (ownership transfer), R79 (sounds like R3b...), and
possibly others.

Correct me if I am wrong but the main goal of these requirements is to allow
for a failover between multiple MidCom agents for sessions which are already
in place. In that case we want the backup MidCom agent to be able to
continue the current services to go on uninterrupted, and eventually
terminated, without compromising security.
So if that is the case wouldn't it be better to have one generic requirement
just for that ("supporting failover...") instead of getting into all those
implementation details in the requirements draft, and leave the actual
implementation to the protocol draft TBD?

_______________________________________________
midcom mailing list
[email-masked]
http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/midcom