Re: [decade] WG Action: Conclusion of Decoupled Application Data Enroute (decade)

Songhaibin <> Sat, 22 September 2012 05:49 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BF3F21F87FE for <>; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 22:49:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.882
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.882 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.717, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iG4vAOtgG6aW for <>; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 22:49:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B25F521F86B1 for <>; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 22:49:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (EHLO ([]) by (MOS 4.3.5-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id AKX94099; Sat, 22 Sep 2012 05:49:04 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Sat, 22 Sep 2012 06:48:23 +0100
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Sat, 22 Sep 2012 06:49:01 +0100
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Sat, 22 Sep 2012 13:48:50 +0800
From: Songhaibin <>
To: Martin Stiemerling <>, "Rahman, Akbar" <>
Thread-Topic: [decade] WG Action: Conclusion of Decoupled Application Data Enroute (decade)
Thread-Index: AQHNmAK+y9myRhkH+kSZKUqot0hH7peVkf+A
Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2012 05:48:50 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <><> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN
Content-Language: zh-CN
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Cc: "" <>, Konstantinos Pentikousis <>
Subject: Re: [decade] WG Action: Conclusion of Decoupled Application Data Enroute (decade)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "To start the discussion on DECoupled Application Data Enroute, to discuss the in-network data storage for p2p applications and its access protocol" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2012 05:49:08 -0000

> Talk to your chairs and consider that the requirements went from
> publication requested (i.e., on the way to the IESG) back to the WG
> (i.e., not on the way to the IESG).
> The same is true for the architecture draft.

I was notified in June about the energy of the working group, but I was also surprised about the abrupt notification of the closure of the WG with the email from Martin on Monday, I saw a good list discussion, new I-D submission and was preparing for the Atlanta meeting when I received this notification. I also expressed my disagree to the comment of lack of technical substances. Before Martin became the AD for the DECADE WG, the architecture document was intended to remove a lot of technical details according to comments received, it's not a protocol draft.

The extensive comments from Martin to these two IDs are mostly effective, but editorial. They could be addressed together with Kostas's comments in the next version . Again, I do not think these two documents are extremely bad and lack of technical substances.