As I was looking at how to present the bit-level contents of NAP
packets, I found that there were several ways to present the information
and each one had some advantage and disadvantages. I don't know what is
best suited for this particular document, especially considering it in
the context of other PWG binding specs, the Microsoft documents, and
thinking ahead, compatibility with an NEA/TNC binding spec.
Attached is an example of one attribute presented in different styles
for your consideration.
Choice #1 is the most consistent with MS-SOH, but it is somewhat more
compact than what MS does.
Choice #2 is a variation on that theme, showing the positions of bits in
bit-fields.
Choice #3 is the most compact, because it embeds values into the diagram
where it is practical to do so.
Choice #4 -- there isn't one, but if you have suggestions or other
examples, I'm open...
I don't really care what we choose, but I think that #2 could be a
problem for long bit-fields. Choice #1 is a safe choice if we're
considering style compatibility with MS, but I also like the compactness
and conciseness of Choice #3.
Please look at the attachment and send me some feedback, or discuss on
the mailing list if that is appropriate.
Thanks,
--
Regards,
Brian Smithson
PM, Security Research
PMP, CISSP, CISA, ISO 27000 PA
Advanced Imaging and Network Technologies
Ricoh Americas Corporation
(408)346-4435
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: style-choices.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 44032 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.pwg.org/archives/ids/attachments/20090205/3a2a86dc/style-choices.doc