Minutes for 0044: Applicant State Machine

Standard: 802.1Q-2011 Clause: 10.7.7 Draft with fix: Status: Rejected
Submitter: Aaron Stewart, Bob Noseworthy Date: 2012-09-06 Rationale: Note 11 of Table 10-3 (Applicant SM) states: “In implementations w...
Show Request Show Preformatted Request
Date Meeting Text Status
2012-09-12 Sep 2012 Interim Mick Seaman will review the MRP set and report back on recommendation Technical experts review
2012-11-13 Nov 2012 Planery Review by Mick Seaman in progress. Technical experts review
2013-01-15 Jan 2013 Interim Reject … for at least the following reasons: (a) instruction to 'ignore' a state change; (b) not responding to rLA! in AO (c) coupling of state machines - leads to many more cases to analyze . It is not very important that the action taken be consistent between the cases of having discarded a state machine and not having discarded. The case of not sending if the Registrar state is MT and the the applicant is not itself attempting to register the attribute, i.e. " is not applying" might be better dealt with by imposing a condition on the s in LO. But there is a purpose to LO even in MT. The question of whether the state machines should be discarded if both LO and MT is really a question of the application consequences of falsely registering MT, balanced against the cost of sending out information (which depends on how many attributes are concerned). Things should be left as they are unless a much more subtle analysis is conducted to give application dependent guidance as to when to ditch the state machines. Rejected