Joseph Hui wrote:
You seem to assume that this will have quite some impact on the
protocol, while Hilarie's viewpoint is that one additional header
would be enough. Can we somehow examine why we come to such different
views?
Yes, there will be impact on the protocol, in terms of
added complexity.
Could you give us an idea of what this complexity is? I believe that
it is only the "this is a chained request/response" header. I might
be wrong, but at least I'm being specific.
That said, in light that during the Yokohama meeting it was
mentioned OPES was four months behind its deliverables,
OPES was chartered with its deliverables due immediately; this appears
to have been a deliberate and unexplained IESG decision. No need to
think that the WG is doing something wrong by actually taking the
time to write the documents and discuss them, no matter what the
charter says.
Hilarie