RE: [Forces-protocol] FE Protocol LFBs

Jamal Hadi Salim <hadi@znyx.com> Sat, 23 October 2004 02:49 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 WAA06383 for <forces-protocol-web-archive@ietf.org>; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 22:49:00 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CLCAi-0003pC-BZ for forces-protocol-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 23:02:24 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CLBws-00048L-PZ; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 22:48:06 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CLBvl-0003gy-2T for forces-protocol@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 22:46:57 -0400
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 WAA06306 for <forces-protocol@ietf.org>; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 22:46:56 -0400 (EDT)
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 1CLC8h-0003mg-Lu for forces-protocol@ietf.org; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 23:00:20 -0400
Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([208.2.156.2]) by lotus.znyx.com (Lotus Domino Release 5.0.11) with ESMTP id 2004102219492484:38705 ; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 19:49:24 -0700
Subject: RE: [Forces-protocol] FE Protocol LFBs
From: Jamal Hadi Salim <hadi@znyx.com>
To: "Khosravi, Hormuzd M" <hormuzd.m.khosravi@intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <468F3FDA28AA87429AD807992E22D07E02FD8F49@orsmsx408>
References: <468F3FDA28AA87429AD807992E22D07E02FD8F49@orsmsx408>
Organization: ZNYX Networks
Message-Id: <1098499610.1097.21.camel@jzny.localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2
Date: 22 Oct 2004 22:46:51 -0400
X-MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on Lotus/Znyx(Release 5.0.11 |July 24, 2002) at 10/22/2004 07:49:25 PM, Serialize by Router on Lotus/Znyx(Release 5.0.11 |July 24, 2002) at 10/22/2004 07:49:28 PM, Serialize complete at 10/22/2004 07:49:28 PM
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 0ddefe323dd869ab027dbfff7eff0465
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: ram.gopal@nokia.com, "Wang, Weiming" <wmwang@mail.hzic.edu.cn>, forces-protocol@ietf.org, avri@psg.com, Ligang Dong <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>
Sender: forces-protocol-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: forces-protocol-bounces@ietf.org
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 3e15cc4fdc61d7bce84032741d11c8e5
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hormuzd,
Hold that thought; I think given the way things are going, the FE object
and Protocol LFBs may become beasts that deserve their own drafts.
Same with the redirector that Weiming is talking about.

For now lets hold them in the draft as is, but there should certainly be
opportunity for them to go out and coauthored by people other than the
model team.

cheers,
jamal

On Fri, 2004-10-22 at 12:30, Khosravi, Hormuzd M wrote:
> Weiming, All 
> 
> We should definitely define these LFBs related with FE, Protocol, etc as
> part of the protocol draft. There is no need to have them in a separate
> draft
> 
> Regards
> Hormuzd
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wang,Weiming [mailto:wmwang@mail.hzic.edu.cn] 
> 
> >
> > Also dont forget to look at the overview section in the latest draft
> > posted by Avri. Theres a little refinement of the split of the two
> LFBs
> > (each in its own section).
> > As to what to do about the FE Object and FE Protocol object, My
> opinion
> > is we should define everything taht we think we will need.
> > I would think the model team will take those needs and make sure its
> > part of the XML spec. Weiming, are you suggesting to do the xml from
> us?
> [Weiming] Yes, but I'm not sure if it should be defined inside this
> protocol
> text or just by another draft. I remember you also mentioned such
> thought
> before. We actually have the same question on Redirect LFBs, anyway any
> LFB like
> things that between FE model and protocol. Now it seems very popular to
> summarize everything as LFB, I even think of TML layer as LFBs from PL
> layer,
> but not sure.
> 
> cheers,
> weiming


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