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

Songhaibin <haibin.song@huawei.com> Sat, 22 September 2012 09:14 UTC

Return-Path: <haibin.song@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: decade@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: decade@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79E0021F86F7 for <decade@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 22 Sep 2012 02:14:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.041
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.041 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.558, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id C37h++jh6HdI for <decade@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 22 Sep 2012 02:14:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C2CA21F86F6 for <decade@ietf.org>; Sat, 22 Sep 2012 02:14:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.5-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id AKY03189; Sat, 22 Sep 2012 09:14:00 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from LHREML406-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.243) by lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.7.223) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Sat, 22 Sep 2012 10:13:30 +0100
Received: from SZXEML439-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.72.61.74) by lhreml406-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.243) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Sat, 22 Sep 2012 10:13:59 +0100
Received: from SZXEML534-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.2.70]) by szxeml439-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.72.61.74]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Sat, 22 Sep 2012 17:13:48 +0800
From: Songhaibin <haibin.song@huawei.com>
To: Songhaibin <haibin.song@huawei.com>, Martin Stiemerling <martin.stiemerling@neclab.eu>, "Rahman, Akbar" <Akbar.Rahman@InterDigital.com>
Thread-Topic: [decade] WG Action: Conclusion of Decoupled Application Data Enroute (decade)
Thread-Index: AQHNmAK+y9myRhkH+kSZKUqot0hH7peVkf+AgACAWcA=
Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2012 09:13:46 +0000
Message-ID: <E33E01DFD5BEA24B9F3F18671078951F23B34011@szxeml534-mbx.china.huawei.com>
References: <20120919230313.17329.44102.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com><505AE794.8070304@neclab.eu> <8D38716F0C1A444BA0CD7E96454366C23A4DDEF6@szxeml545-mbx.china.huawei.com> <D60519DB022FFA48974A25955FFEC08C04B138D2@SAM.InterDigital.com> <505C74F3.7060002@neclab.eu> <E33E01DFD5BEA24B9F3F18671078951F23B33F6F@szxeml534-mbx.china.huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <E33E01DFD5BEA24B9F3F18671078951F23B33F6F@szxeml534-mbx.china.huawei.com>
Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.138.41.123]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Cc: "decade@ietf.org" <decade@ietf.org>, Konstantinos Pentikousis <k.pentikousis@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [decade] WG Action: Conclusion of Decoupled Application Data Enroute (decade)
X-BeenThere: decade@ietf.org
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" <decade.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/decade>, <mailto:decade-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/decade>
List-Post: <mailto:decade@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:decade-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/decade>, <mailto:decade-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2012 09:14:03 -0000

>Again, I do not think these two documents are extremely bad and lack
> of technical substances.

Just to make a clarification, I wanted to express these two documents are not perfect, but they are good. And I admit the documents could have been written elaborate if we paid more attention to the editing work.

BR,
-Haibin

> -----Original Message-----
> From: decade-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:decade-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> Songhaibin
> Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2012 1:49 PM
> To: Martin Stiemerling; Rahman, Akbar
> Cc: decade@ietf.org; Konstantinos Pentikousis
> Subject: Re: [decade] WG Action: Conclusion of Decoupled Application Data
> Enroute (decade)
> 
> > 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.
> 
> BR,
> -Haibin