Re: [alto] Question about unified framework for properties

[Wendy Roome <[e-mail]>]

Lingli,

My "Unified Approach To Properties" proposal was independent of yours: you
proposed new properties, I proposed a new framework for accessing
properties. The two proposals complement each other, rather than compete
with each other.

I have not filed a draft for it, though. I came up with the idea too late to
submit a formal draft for Dallas, so I just presented the slides.
Unfortunately, the audience's response was less enthusiastic than I had
hoped, and it seemed like there were other more pressing issues, so I did
not bother to formalize the proposal with a draft.

But I still think it is a good idea. If anyone thinks this is worth
pursuing, please let me know!

- Wendy Roome

From:  Lingli Deng <[e-mail]>
Date:  Wed, June 3, 2015 at 02:54
To:  Wendy Roome <[e-mail]>
Cc:  "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
Subject:  Question about unified framework for properties

Hi Wendy,

I am currently working on a revision for draft on Extended endpoint
properties (I.D-draft-deng-alto-p2p-ext),  and noticed there is concern
about potential overlap during last meeting with your proposal on a unified
framework for properties.
I am afraid that I was not there for the onsite discussion, but after
reading your slides, I feel it seems to be orthogonal with endpoint
properties. What do you think?
BTW, I could not find any draft for the proposed framework. Are you working
on such a document or is there anybody else doing this? If so, I would be
happy to read it and double check its relevance with or effect on our work
on endpoint properties.

Regards,
Lingli