Re: [Fwd: [Forces-protocol] Presentation of the options for LFB-level multicast]

Jamal Hadi Salim <hadi@znyx.com> Wed, 10 November 2004 15:53 UTC

Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA22990 for <forces-protocol-web-archive@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Nov 2004 10:53:01 -0500 (EST)
Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CRunM-0005aE-ET for forces-protocol-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 10 Nov 2004 10:54:04 -0500
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CRudM-0006uL-Hv; Wed, 10 Nov 2004 10:43:44 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CRuV5-00057X-KS for forces-protocol@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 10 Nov 2004 10:35:13 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA20840 for <forces-protocol@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Nov 2004 10:35:08 -0500 (EST)
Received: from znx208-2-156-007.znyx.com ([208.2.156.7] helo=lotus.znyx.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CRuW3-00057e-Ib for forces-protocol@ietf.org; Wed, 10 Nov 2004 10:36:12 -0500
Received: from localhost ([208.2.156.2]) by lotus.znyx.com (Lotus Domino Release 5.0.11) with ESMTP id 2004111007384490:17809 ; Wed, 10 Nov 2004 07:38:44 -0800
Subject: Re: [Fwd: [Forces-protocol] Presentation of the options for LFB-level multicast]
From: Jamal Hadi Salim <hadi@znyx.com>
To: "Wang,Weiming" <wmwang@mail.hzic.edu.cn>
In-Reply-To: <142a01c4c6d6$13569980$845c21d2@Necom.hzic.edu.cn>
References: <4189F776.4080306@zurich.ibm.com> <1099700691.1038.2.camel@jzny.localdomain> <005101c4c408$dc341600$020aa8c0@wwm1> <1099752095.1037.11.camel@jzny.localdomain> <003201c4c46d$1bbce4a0$020aa8c0@wwm1><004201c4c4ec$61d34c20$020aa8c0@wwm1> <1099829057.2165.18.camel@jzny.localdomain> <00bd01c4c536$fb418ee0$020aa8c0@wwm1> <1099885892.2167.13.camel@jzny.localdomain> <132001c4c551$86023150$845c21d2@Necom.hzic.edu.cn> <1099911200.2169.29.camel@jzny.localdomain> <134f01c4c585$216584c0$845c21d2@Necom.hzic.edu.cn> <4191299F.4020809@zurich.ibm.com> <142a01c4c6d6$13569980$845c21d2@Necom.hzic.edu.cn>
Organization: ZNYX Networks
Message-Id: <1100100893.2210.24.camel@jzny.localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2
Date: 10 Nov 2004 10:34:54 -0500
X-MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on Lotus/Znyx(Release 5.0.11 |July 24, 2002) at 11/10/2004 07:38:45 AM, Serialize by Router on Lotus/Znyx(Release 5.0.11 |July 24, 2002) at 11/10/2004 07:38:59 AM
X-Spam-Score: 2.2 (++)
X-Scan-Signature: 3002fc2e661cd7f114cb6bae92fe88f1
Cc: "Khosravi, Hormuzd M" <hormuzd.m.khosravi@intel.com>, "\(Ram Gopal \)" <ram.gopal@nokia.com>, Avri Doria <avri@acm.org>, forces-protocol@ietf.org, joel@STEVECROCKER.COM, Patrick Droz <dro@zurich.ibm.com>, David.Putzolu@intel.com, Dong Ligang <donglg@mail.hzic.edu.cn>, Robert Haas <rha@zurich.ibm.com>
X-BeenThere: forces-protocol@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: hadi@znyx.com
List-Id: forces-protocol <forces-protocol.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/forces-protocol>, <mailto:forces-protocol-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/forces-protocol>
List-Post: <mailto:forces-protocol@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:forces-protocol-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/forces-protocol>, <mailto:forces-protocol-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0348107540=="
Sender: forces-protocol-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: forces-protocol-bounces@ietf.org
X-Spam-Score: 2.2 (++)
X-Scan-Signature: a87a9cdae4ac5d3fbeee75cd0026d632

Hi Weiming,

I am not sure if this is what you are saying all along, but i think it
may be valuable to have "relative" path encoding.

i.e you say parent-path=1,2,3,4 then everything else is relative to
that.
Example if you say 5 afterwards for relative path, then the full path
is: 1,2,3,4,5.

I still dont think that "5" should be in the data portion though.

cheers,
jamal

On Tue, 2004-11-09 at 22:33, Wang,Weiming wrote:
> Hi Robert,
>  
> Thank you very much to bring the slides to the meeting. 
>  
>  ----- Original Message ----- 
>         From: Robert Haas
>         Subject: Re: [Fwd: [Forces-protocol] Presentation of the
>         options for LFB-level multicast]
>         
>         All,
>         I presented Weiming's slides just after Jamal's presentation
>         yesterday. No divergence of views on the principle of how to
>         describe paths was found.
>         
>         Whereas, according to his slides, Weiming considers that the
>         distinction of Attribute, field, and index, must be reflected
>         in the path notation, the consensus in the room was that this
>         is not necessary: a path could be x.y.z, where it is clear
>         that x must be an attribute, and y and z can be field or
>         index. No need to mention it explicitely in the path notation.
>         [Weiming] Actually this is not the key point. While I'm just a
>         little afraid it may lead to ambiguity if , e.g., z can be a
>         field ID or a subscript without tag to indicate it.  
>         The path can be constructed with index-search or
>         content-search. The consensus in the room was that the path
>         should include the whole thing, not only the first attribute,
>         as opposed to Weiming's suggestion on the last slide.
>         [Weiming]This is really the key point. We need to verify if it
>         is possible for a single 'path'  format to describe all need
>         for path. I just think that, apart from the attribute ID part,
>         others are tightly combined with Data. We may feel difficulty
>         to try to separate path explicitly.  
>         Content-search remains to be defined more precisely, as well
>         as block access. So it is too early to disagree ;-)
>         
>         Regards,
>         -Robert
>         
>         Thank you again.
>         Weiming
>         Wang,Weiming wrote:
>         
>         > Jamal,
>         > 
>         > ----- Original Message -----
>         > From: "Jamal Hadi Salim" <hadi@znyx.com>
>         > 
>         >   
>         > > On Mon, 2004-11-08 at 00:12, Wang,Weiming wrote:
>         > >     
>         > > > Jamal,
>         > > > ----- Original Message -----
>         > > > From: "Jamal Hadi Salim" <hadi@znyx.com>
>         > > > To: "Weiming Wang" <wmwang@mail.hzic.edu.cn>
>         > > > 
>         > > >       
>         > > > > I still dont see what where we have differences. If Robert can see that
>         > > > > difference i think it would be worth presenting it.
>         > > > >         
>         > > > 
>         > > > Sorry, but I don't think it's very proper for you to try to stop an
>         > > >       
>         > 
>         > individual
>         >   
>         > > > presentation :)
>         > > >       
>         > > 
>         > > The first step is to understand what you are trying to show.
>         > > Look at how many emails it took for you to say "i see the difference".
>         > >     
>         > 
>         > Sorry, I know the difference very well, just can not see why you cannot catch
>         > it. That's just the 'i see the difference' mean.
>         > 
>         > Cheers,
>         > Weiming
>         > 
>         >   
>         > > So i am not trying to stop your presentation rather trying to understand
>         > > what you are saying. Let me go back and read your other email now.
>         > > 
>         > > cheers,
>         > > jamal
>         > > 
>         > > PS:- Everyone i have talked to here upto before i went to bed did not
>         > > see any difference. This includes Robert.
>         > > 
>         > >     
>         > 
>         > 
>         > 
>         > 
>         >   
>         
>         
>         -- 
>         Robert Haas
>         IBM Zurich Research Laboratory
>         Säumerstrasse 4
>         CH-8803 Rüschlikon/Switzerland
>         phone +41-1-724-8698  fax +41-1-724-8578  http://www.zurich.ibm.com/~rha
> 
> 
> ______________________________________________________________________
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Forces-protocol mailing list
> Forces-protocol@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/forces-protocol

_______________________________________________
Forces-protocol mailing list
Forces-protocol@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/forces-protocol