First anonymous review

[naiithink]

By: anonymous

• Specification file
  • Unclear definition and terminology
    • Clients, servers, senders, recipients -- this led to confusion
      over message semantics
    • Checksum accumulation
    • Cookies
    • Tokens
  • The sequence diagram "DXP Sequence" illustrates parts may not need to be
    in a protocol specification, let the implementers do their jobs -- we focus on how messages look like,
    how they are sent, and what action to take to handle them
    (message handling mechanism). Parts such as:
    • Token manipulation on hosts
• Authentication: this protocol should define some authentication mechanism
  to ensure that the other end of the connection has valid access
  to the resource being requested.

[naiithink]

I do agree on every aspect of this comment.

The specification is really unclear. I did not have a clear view of how a protocol should be defined.
In my opinion, I should:

• Have a full understanding of protocol specification writing.
• Consider important and significant features of the protocol.
• Redesign the protocol and rewrite the specification. State a clear definition for each terminology.

But if anyone reading this comment wants to share your opinion or guide me, please do.
I am happy to be mentored 😊