Suggestions for working toward a single solution (was Re: [DNA] NoFastRA unless Landmark)

[Greg Daley <greg.daley@eng.monash.edu.au>]

Hi Syam,

Syam Madanapalli wrote:
[cut]
>>
>> That's not to say that draft-pentland-dna-protocol is the
>> complete solution just because Hash Based FastRA is defined there
>> (for example).
> 
> 
> I agree with you and WG will decide. But I see two proposals
> 1. Landmark based and 2. Linkid based, both are from Design
> team. I think somebody from the design team can put the pros
> and cons of each method on WG mailing list, so that people
> will have some idea before the WG meeting in Paris

Please be aware that the draft-pentland-dna-protocol's link
identification is not just a landmark based scheme, but also
provides a LinkID in the form of CompleteRA.



Since there's such good discussion going on, I think
it would be good to get the points presented on-list
to decide well before the meeting.

There may be issues raised beforehand which need to be resolved,
but we can make consensus calls (with appropriate durations
and prior warnings) on-list.

Only the issues which can't be resolved would have to wait
until the meeting.

Does that sound reasonable?

It would require that people are familiar with solutions to the
point where they could make a decision.

So anyone who hasn't been reading the solutions proposals,
please find some time to do so soon.

Greg