[decade] Merge requirements documents?

"Strandberg, Ove (NSN - FI/Espoo)" <ove.strandberg@nsn.com> Fri, 04 June 2010 07:14 UTC

Return-Path: <ove.strandberg@nsn.com>
X-Original-To: decade@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: decade@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 003133A6A26 for <decade@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Jun 2010 00:14:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.002
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rjYRg8xugMgK for <decade@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Jun 2010 00:14:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from demumfd002.nsn-inter.net (demumfd002.nsn-inter.net [93.183.12.31]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FB793A6A2A for <decade@ietf.org>; Fri, 4 Jun 2010 00:14:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from demuprx016.emea.nsn-intra.net ([10.150.129.55]) by demumfd002.nsn-inter.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id o547EST3027134 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for <decade@ietf.org>; Fri, 4 Jun 2010 09:14:28 +0200
Received: from demuexc024.nsn-intra.net (demuexc024.nsn-intra.net [10.159.32.11]) by demuprx016.emea.nsn-intra.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id o547EOsJ028024 for <decade@ietf.org>; Fri, 4 Jun 2010 09:14:27 +0200
Received: from FIESEXC015.nsn-intra.net ([10.159.0.23]) by demuexc024.nsn-intra.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 4 Jun 2010 09:14:11 +0200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01CB03B5.882926AB"
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2010 10:14:11 +0300
Message-ID: <AC126D9A37B1EF4DAE0A39C02E94E64702AF0DDA@FIESEXC015.nsn-intra.net>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: Merge requirements documents?
Thread-Index: AcsDtYexSQ0Cv06zSgGdbDwQ0fMWEg==
From: "Strandberg, Ove (NSN - FI/Espoo)" <ove.strandberg@nsn.com>
To: decade@ietf.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Jun 2010 07:14:11.0667 (UTC) FILETIME=[880C6A30:01CB03B5]
Subject: [decade] Merge requirements documents?
X-BeenThere: decade@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
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/listinfo/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: Fri, 04 Jun 2010 07:14:48 -0000

Dear Decade email list,

There were additional requirements identified for Decade that was
presented and discussed in the Anaheim IETF meeting (see minutes in
http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/10mar/minutes/decade.html). We
basically brought some few additional requirements to complement the
already nice requirement list in draft-gu-decade-reqs-04. The authors of
the draft-ohlman-decade-add-use-cases-reqs-00 draft would like to
suggest that the additional requirements could be incorporated into one 
requirement document, albeit into the draft-gu-decade-reqs-04 draft. The
two first requirements "application agnostic" and "data reuse" seemed to
be well received, while the "mobility" requirement needs further
discussion. What do the authors of draft-gu-decade-reqs-04 think about
this merge proposal?

We would like to also ask the DECADE email list to make comments on the
suggestion to combine both drafts into one document. Is this an
acceptable way forward?

Br,

+Ove

ove.strandberg@nsn.com