IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [drinks] DRAFT minutes of the 2013-05-16 conference call.

Sumanth Channabasappa <sumanth@cablelabs.com> Wed, 22 May 2013 22:27 UTC

Return-Path: <sumanth@cablelabs.com>
X-Original-To: drinks@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: drinks@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D80F811E813A for <drinks@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 May 2013 15:27:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.463
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.463 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_MODEMCABLE=0.768, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QAaq2N52WWGr for <drinks@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 May 2013 15:27:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ondar.cablelabs.com (ondar.cablelabs.com [192.160.73.61]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DB6711E814B for <drinks@ietf.org>; Wed, 22 May 2013 15:27:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from kyzyl.cablelabs.com (kyzyl [10.253.0.7]) by ondar.cablelabs.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r4MMQxZ1029160 for <drinks@ietf.org>; Wed, 22 May 2013 16:26:59 -0600
Received: from exchange.cablelabs.com (10.5.0.19) by kyzyl.cablelabs.com (F-Secure/fsigk_smtp/407/kyzyl.cablelabs.com); Wed, 22 May 2013 16:26:59 -0600 (MDT)
X-Virus-Status: clean(F-Secure/fsigk_smtp/407/kyzyl.cablelabs.com)
Received: from EXCHANGE.cablelabs.com ([fe80::797a:96d1:3c53:18ee]) by EXCHANGE.cablelabs.com ([fe80::797a:96d1:3c53:18ee%11]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Wed, 22 May 2013 16:26:59 -0600
From: Sumanth Channabasappa <sumanth@cablelabs.com>
To: "drinks@ietf.org" <drinks@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [drinks] DRAFT minutes of the 2013-05-16 conference call.
Thread-Index: Ac5WC2CkxZZE/wXAQJ+MeSaZ2npL5ABMBd2A
Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 22:26:58 +0000
Message-ID: <CDC2A1E6.33D19%sumanth@cablelabs.com>
In-Reply-To: <19F54F2956911544A32543B8A9BDE0750A24C705@NICS-EXCH2.sbg.nic.at>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.3.4.130416
x-originating-ip: [10.5.0.27]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <CC6CE58ADE36ED459D6EF9A5784D04DB@cablelabs.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Approved: ondar
Subject: Re: [drinks] DRAFT minutes of the 2013-05-16 conference call.
X-BeenThere: drinks@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DRINKS WG <drinks.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/drinks>, <mailto:drinks-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/drinks>
List-Post: <mailto:drinks@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:drinks-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/drinks>, <mailto:drinks-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 22:27:08 -0000

Folks,

Can you please post your thoughts around the pros and cons as you seem
them so that we can resolve this topic? It will be useful to have this (on
the list) before we have another design team call. See below for details.

Thanks!
- S (as the co-chair)

On 5/21/13 4:20 AM, "Alexander Mayrhofer" <alexander.mayrhofer@nic.at>
wrote:

>
>DRINKS design team conference call
>===========================
>
>2013-05-16, 08:30 - 09:00am Pacific Time
>
>Participants
>--------------
>
>  - Mickael Marrache
>  - Dean Willis
>  - Alex Mayrhofer
>  - David Schwartz
>  - Syed Ali
>  - Vikas Bhatia
>
>AI
>---
>
>1/ (All) Post PROs and CONs regarding DGname as component of PI Key Type
>to mailing list  (if not yet posted)
>2/ (Design Team) Make informed decision based on full information
>
>Minutes
>----------
>
>1) clarification that cardinality mistake in diagram is solved - will be
>changed  (Figure 2 - Relation between PI and DG)
>
>2) discussion about whether DGname should be part of the publickeytype.
>
>Vikas: What new information came to table that we didn't have before?
>David: Implementation work brought this up.
>Alex (individual): Having optional attribute as key component sounds
>illogical (although understand that NULL values can be key components)
>Vikas: What do we gain when we remove it?
>David: Implementation is much easier.
>Dean: Simplification might subsequently lead to more deployment?
>
>Vikas: two options - again, what new has come to light to change this
>former decision?
>Dean: Optional keys & hibernation in DB are complex..
>Vikas: We need more arguments than just "this is complex"
>David: Only Counter-argument he hears is "let's not change it" - Can
>someone come up with a use case why this is needen, What the advantage is
>to leave it in besides avoiding a change?
>Vikas: Argument is not inertia, but what is the new information?
>David: new info is implementation experience.
>David: Optional parameter as key component is not the way to do data
>modesl. 
>Vikas: Depends on the case.
>
>Alex (as chair): 
>Conclusion: No concensus yet. We Need more information - Please post PROs
>and CONs to the list,
>so that we can make an informed decision, hopefully over the course of
>the next week
>
>Call concludes.
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>drinks mailing list
>drinks@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/drinks
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email