Re: [CDNi] SVA extensions next drafts

+1

Sent from my iPhone

> On Feb 6, 2018, at 10:50 AM, Phil Sorber <sorber@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> As an individual, I like the idea of the split. As long as the overhead of having that many drafts in the air isn't too much. Keeps all the concerns separate.
> 
> As a chair, that's a lot more to shepherd but I think that's still fine. It means we can make progress on different drafts instead of it being held up in one giant monolithic draft.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
>> On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 7:41 AM Ori Finkelman <orif@qwilt.com> wrote:
>> Also, 
>> I am planning to draft the trigger extensions and the triggers capability objects as a separate draft for extension of RFC8007.
>> 
>> Best regards,
>> Ori
>> 
>>> On Sun, Feb 4, 2018 at 3:42 PM, Ori Finkelman <orif@qwilt.com> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> I am planning to split the current SVA open caching draft https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-finkelman-cdni-sva-extensions-00 into separate functions.
>>> + request routing
>>> + content management (triggers)
>>> + URI signing 
>>> + CORS delegation
>>> + Logging
>>> each will have its own draft, shorter and easier to review and edit.
>>> 
>>> Let me know if there are any reservations. 
>>> Best regards,
>>> Ori
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Ori Finkelman
>>> Qwilt | Work: +972-72-2221647 | Mobile: +972-52-3832189 | orif@qwilt.com
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Ori Finkelman
>> Qwilt | Work: +972-72-2221647 | Mobile: +972-52-3832189 | orif@qwilt.com
>> _______________________________________________
>> CDNi mailing list
>> CDNi@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cdni
> _______________________________________________
> CDNi mailing list
> CDNi@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cdni