IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [lmap] Merged framework draft

marcelo bagnulo braun <marcelo@it.uc3m.es> Mon, 23 September 2013 09:21 UTC

Return-Path: <marcelo@it.uc3m.es>
X-Original-To: lmap@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lmap@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 872F211E8192 for <lmap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Sep 2013 02:21:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.349
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.349 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.350, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_72=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 BYVIvI1sto60 for <lmap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Sep 2013 02:21:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp02.uc3m.es (smtp02.uc3m.es [163.117.176.132]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F3F311E8186 for <lmap@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 Sep 2013 02:21:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp02.uc3m.es (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.uc3m.es (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CCB989466D for <lmap@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 Sep 2013 11:21:27 +0200 (CEST)
X-uc3m-safe: yes
Received: from [163.117.203.127] (unknown [163.117.203.127]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: marcelo@smtp02.uc3m.es) by smtp02.uc3m.es (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F0553890EF9 for <lmap@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 Sep 2013 11:21:26 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <52400816.7070900@it.uc3m.es>
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2013 11:21:26 +0200
From: marcelo bagnulo braun <marcelo@it.uc3m.es>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130801 Thunderbird/17.0.8
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: lmap@ietf.org
References: <A2E337CDB7BC4145B018B9BEE8EB3E0D3FF9CFD7CE@EMV67-UKRD.domain1.systemhost.net> <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA128E22FE@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> <A2E337CDB7BC4145B018B9BEE8EB3E0D3FF9CFD7E0@EMV67-UKRD.domain1.systemhost.net>
In-Reply-To: <A2E337CDB7BC4145B018B9BEE8EB3E0D3FF9CFD7E0@EMV67-UKRD.domain1.systemhost.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelistedACL 131 matched, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (smtp02.uc3m.es); Mon, 23 Sep 2013 11:21:27 +0200 (CEST)
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.1.0.1224-7.0.0.1014-20168.006
X-TM-AS-Result: No--24.508-7.0-31-1
X-imss-scan-details: No--24.508-7.0-31-1
Subject: Re: [lmap] Merged framework draft
X-BeenThere: lmap@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Large Scale Measurement of Access network Performance <lmap.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lmap>, <mailto:lmap-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/lmap>
List-Post: <mailto:lmap@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lmap-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lmap>, <mailto:lmap-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2013 09:21:55 -0000

agree

El 23/09/13 11:04, philip.eardley@bt.com escribió:
>
> Personally I think it is
>
> *From:*Romascanu, Dan (Dan) [mailto:dromasca@avaya.com]
> *Sent:* 23 September 2013 09:56
> *To:* Eardley,PL,Philip,TUB8 R; lmap@ietf.org
> *Subject:* RE: Merged framework draft
>
> Hi,
>
> Thanks to Philip and all the authors for the good work.
>
> We need however to be a little more aggressive. The WG charter 
> includes the following milestone.
>
> Sep 2013
>
> 	
>
> Initial WG I-D for the LMAP Framework including terminology
>
> According to the authors – is this I-D in good enough shape for 
> becoming the initial WG I-D? If the authors say ‘yes’ the chairs can 
> ask on the WG list about consensus on this issue.
>
> We have a similar milestone for the Use Cases document.
>
> Regards,
>
> Dan
>
> *From:*lmap-bounces@ietf.org <mailto:lmap-bounces@ietf.org> 
> [mailto:lmap-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *philip.eardley@bt.com 
> <mailto:philip.eardley@bt.com>
> *Sent:* Monday, September 23, 2013 11:47 AM
> *To:* lmap@ietf.org <mailto:lmap@ietf.org>
> *Subject:* [lmap] Merged framework draft
>
> We have been working on a framework draft that merges the previous 2 
> framework drafts & the terminology draft, as well as including various 
> things that have been discussed on the list since.
>
> Our plan is to produce an update before the Vancouver deadline. We 
> have a few things that we’re planning to work on, but we wanted to get 
> it out in order to get everyone else’s comments.
>
> http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-folks-lmap-framework-00.txt
>
> Terminology:
>
> Information Model definition tweaked, new definition for Subscriber 
> and Test Traffic.
>
> Protocol Model:
>
> Added a high-level protocol model
>
> Privacy considerations:
>
> A substantial new section. It may be better removing it and security 
> considerations into a new draft about threats and how to alleviate them?
>
> Looking forward to the discussions!
>
> Phil, Al, Paul, Marcelo, Aamer, Trevor.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> lmap mailing list
> lmap@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lmap

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email