Re: [ietf-sow] Fwd: Agenda Development RFP SOW for Community Input

Henrik Levkowetz <> Mon, 14 November 2011 10:49 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8B6421F8E92 for <>; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 02:49:44 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.446
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.446 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.153, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MtuowiYNjd9q for <>; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 02:49:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from (unknown [IPv6:2a01:3f0:0:31:214:22ff:fe21:bb]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id C305B21F8DF0 for <>; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 02:49:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [] (port=22420 helo=vigonier.local) by with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from <>) id 1RPu5y-00015e-Qg; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 11:48:59 +0100
Message-ID: <>
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 18:48:53 +0800
From: Henrik Levkowetz <>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111105 Thunderbird/8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Robert Sparks <>
References: <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 22 Mar 2010 06:51:10 +0000)
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on
Cc: Russ Housley <>,
Subject: Re: [ietf-sow] Fwd: Agenda Development RFP SOW for Community Input
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: SOW Feedback List <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 10:49:45 -0000

Trimming to only one particular point where I have input:

On 2011-11-11 17:33 Robert Sparks said the following:

>>> Under the agenda manipulation sections - why don't we allow users (of whatever
>>> level) to save proposed agendas and refer to them by name (preferably with a URL
>>> that goes back to them). This would allow several people to propose conflict
>>> resolutions. It would be even better if the tool provided a way to easily
>>> visualize the difference between any two saved agendas. This saving motif
>>> could be leveraged to simplify some of the requirements around identifying
>>> what the current draft or "final" agenda are.
>> I'm not sure.  This could lead to a very significant amount of storage.  Also, it will not be useful after a few days.
> I don't think each save would be that large, and we could cause it to have a finite lifetime.
> But if I'm wrong about size, we could alternatively look at making it something that could
> be returned to the user as a blob instead of storing it in the database.

The actual data constituting a scheduled set is not particularly large --
unless this is done in an incredibly inept manner, I think the overhead of
storing instances of scheduling solutions is negligible.

Best regards,