IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [alto] Question about unified framework for properties

"Y. Richard Yang" <yry@cs.yale.edu> Fri, 05 June 2015 15:51 UTC

Return-Path: <yang.r.yang@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: alto@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: alto@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C6B61B3165 for <alto@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 Jun 2015 08:51:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.277
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.277 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yLfQBnIljl58 for <alto@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 Jun 2015 08:51:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ig0-x234.google.com (mail-ig0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 847B91B3148 for <alto@ietf.org>; Fri, 5 Jun 2015 08:51:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by igbpi8 with SMTP id pi8so18895602igb.1 for <alto@ietf.org>; Fri, 05 Jun 2015 08:51:40 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=9QBnauS12AvEuMS7tr7YmTPsRbrsEoDtSr7bHJY8c3Q=; b=uD+rEXHmHHcGHIArIrwLOkfpPTHjjjO7Ns2u3rysaHsZivNQDLHFt3Hj3b9K3dw8gn lC4Q3jN6VRid/horQFHQVQq+O6l5e2KqnqbTMxj07xAgXtV4rBUQ64o51iGBsFsr4vsp coWwQiROEhsLh3vqxRjElgX563hXxFE1RtxXmAy+4dsIQ/cjyf0Ay+idtvpHAf1v3rF0 iU33b/FlDjL47gnqVk2YLCRo2Qnx+pGRrhzjmi7SQ6CF8J/S/qtrF8gS9sIikNoQosY7 7li8I/qfd/b5QA6F77HZ5x1RpIjjnMSE5/kLFYjUj7W+PbJ4ApBpISPHMwNQZyRZpvdc CgFQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.107.9.223 with SMTP id 92mr5306943ioj.71.1433519500056; Fri, 05 Jun 2015 08:51:40 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: yang.r.yang@gmail.com
Received: by 10.36.141.70 with HTTP; Fri, 5 Jun 2015 08:51:40 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <D197364C.2530F3%w.roome@alcatel-lucent.com>
References: <BAY167-W317FB9F86A15B155938130F3B40@phx.gbl> <D197364C.2530F3%w.roome@alcatel-lucent.com>
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2015 11:51:40 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: s8Sx74Gx6iHihdmaonPtsVWFAKc
Message-ID: <CANUuoLoK_2OXz3po+cbhnvf8b0Q7o=+YWyVfDPHQoGTWHUi4hA@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Y. Richard Yang" <yry@cs.yale.edu>
To: Wendy Roome <w.roome@alcatel-lucent.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a113eca34945fd20517c74474"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/mDXsXIsmRi5hgXv0hZ8eoTWKjFE>
Cc: "alto@ietf.org" <alto@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [alto] Question about unified framework for properties
X-BeenThere: alto@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Application-Layer Traffic Optimization \(alto\) WG mailing list" <alto.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/alto>, <mailto:alto-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/alto/>
List-Post: <mailto:alto@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:alto-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto>, <mailto:alto-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2015 15:51:42 -0000

Wendy,

Just to add to the discussion. I found a unified framework highly appealing
and your proposal is a great starting point! I support that we develop it
formally.

Richard

On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 11:28 AM, Wendy Roome <w.roome@alcatel-lucent.com>
wrote:

> 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 <lingli.deng@outlook.com>
> Date: Wed, June 3, 2015 at 02:54
> To: Wendy Roome <w.roome@alcatel-lucent.com>
> Cc: "alto@ietf.org" <alto@ietf.org>
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> alto mailing list
> alto@ietf.org
>
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_alto&d=AwICAg&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=4G36iiEVb2m_v-0RnP2gx9KZJjYQgfvrOCE3789JGIA&m=T9W7BQ0EZITsYhWxd-okJBl7h5D-yhmL6cTKv4g42vo&s=O6_Q7MWf6RW0VE96kzvDxJjZNcinC9UgawBB06ruTiE&e=
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email