Re: [apps-discuss] Two VDI(Virtual Desktop Infrastructure) related drafts submitted in appsawg for your comments

Barry Leiba <> Fri, 24 June 2011 13:59 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3EC111E80A1 for <>; Fri, 24 Jun 2011 06:59:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.63
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.63 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.253, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, J_CHICKENPOX_37=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id G1dEG-IPsfee for <>; Fri, 24 Jun 2011 06:59:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AC4411E8076 for <>; Fri, 24 Jun 2011 06:59:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by ywp31 with SMTP id 31so1675618ywp.31 for <>; Fri, 24 Jun 2011 06:59:42 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=bqPAxR3+SEIqjhd8avu09J+ODp+5v+c1jmCCs4Why28=; b=EGPS0rbch+rSCGYJNMYkTLwXClyeXn52k7DZCZVUQcsMvWYC/2hewP6wlBvxF8GJgK 6aiq4eZPmLiagDZKI/4KTeBhijyJZ/I2bMsYETpJJKBfUJ4x/Ww42Cq7ZSgfsqg06JFl DvGRdrFVUUBkrQq5HhRaGExYI/pD3vQ9AIL7c=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=cM1/6gK/Xi8dkGO5aceSO4Rrsph2sd8lcIJF9BsaHW3C7W5YcsaKu06Vw7yiSz2dmT 5iUhjJezW1BoZlkF3KCpN0gf6RLmuTFZp/GfKI06ellEIfZajnn5UwE3eI1DDaRx4IiL caMJ+6KR5GttUxG2a7PljdRmGTwgjm98PBumU=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by with SMTP id b25mr3623368yab.0.1308923981587; Fri, 24 Jun 2011 06:59:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with HTTP; Fri, 24 Jun 2011 06:59:41 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <>
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 09:59:41 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: TtnKHHVISkAOMg9Vf8r6SG_bc2o
Message-ID: <>
From: Barry Leiba <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Two VDI(Virtual Desktop Infrastructure) related drafts submitted in appsawg for your comments
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 13:59:43 -0000

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 5:33 AM,  <> wrote:
> 1st Draft: draft-wang-appsawg-vdi-problem-statement-00.txt
>    This document summarizes the limitations of existing virtual desktop
> systems,
>    and proposes the intent standardization work in IETF.
> URL for this draft:
> 2nd Draft: Survey of Virtual Desktop Infrastructure System
>    This document presents a survey of VDI (Virtual Desktop
>    Infrastructure) system, including different product arch.
>    and VDI protocols.
> URL for this draft:

I want to point out here that, while the authors have given the
documents filenames with "appsawg" in them, these are not appsawg
documents, and they are not under consideration as appsawg documents.
The naming is fine, and it allows you to see them as "related"
documents on the appsawg tools page ( ).  How they will proceed, if
there is consensus to proceed with them, is entirely undecided.

Of course, we do encourage Applications Area participants to review
and comment on the documents, and this list is a fine place to do that
until something changes.

Barry, appsawg chair