One of the PPP authors told me several years ago that PPP only used two
messages; perhaps it has changed. IKE does use just the two messages.
Preference of A1 over A2 is expressed as (A1 or A2); preference of A2 over
A1 is expressed as (A2 or A1), just like compilers do it.
OPES will have a rule compiler, it can certainly have a preference
compiler.
Hilarie
I do not follow you. PPP has configure-request, configure-response,
configure-nak and configure-rej to indicate that some capabilities are
not-acceptable and others the peer proposes a differente value.
Anyway, I understand your proposal, but is awkard to put every single
acceptable value/range/strings for every capability. There might be
excessive overhead. On another point, how would you express preference of A1
over A2? I guess ((A1) or A2)?
Alex,
In order to leverage cached negotiations, we can ask every negotiation to
bear a identification number that is unique. Other negotiations can refer to
it.
Regards,
Reinaldo
> -----Original Message-----
> From: The Purple Streak, Hilarie Orman
[mailto:ho(_at_)alum(_dot_)mit(_dot_)edu]
> Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 6:15 PM
> To: rousskov(_at_)measurement-factory(_dot_)com
> Cc: ietf-openproxy(_at_)imc(_dot_)org
> Subject: Re: Capability Negotiation for OCP
>
>
>
> PPP, IPSec and IKE use "offer, select". The trick is to
> spell out the complete set of selections at offer time.
> Don't say (A1 or A2) and (B1 or B2) if (A1 and B2) is not
> permitted - say instead
>
> { A2 and (B1 or B2) } or { A1 and B1}
>
> Hilarie
>