[p2p-sip] Revised concepts draft

[sathya at research.panasonic.com (Sathya Narayanan)]

I also think drafts should remain separate for now.

IMHO, we should be focusing on the charter right now; the output documents and their scopes should evolve out of the charter. Discussing the documents and their scopes without the base charter seems a bit premature to me.

-Sathya 

----- Original Message -----
From: Henry Sinnreich <hsinnrei at adobe.com>
Date: Monday, August 21, 2006 11:00 am
Subject: Re: [p2p-sip] Revised concepts draft

> I agree the two drafts should remain separate.
> 
> Thanks, Henry
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: p2p-sip-bounces at cs.columbia.edu
> [p2p-sip-bounces at cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Bruce Lowekamp
> Sent: Monday, August 21, 2006 11:24 AM
> To: Eunsoo Shim
> Cc: p2p-sip at cs.columbia.edu
> Subject: Re: [p2p-sip] Revised concepts draft
> 
> I think that for now the use-cases draft should remain separate and,
> if there are significant new use cases proposed to add to it, they
> should be added.  We should also revise it to reflect the current
> terminology, of course.  A number of decisions were made about what
> will be in-scope and out-of-scope at the last ad hoc.  In the process
> of forming the WG and finalizing the charter, those decisions will be
> re-examined and formalized/changed.  My understanding is that the
> use-cases document will need to be trimmed, updated, merged, etc at
> that point to reflect use-cases that fall within the proposed 
> scope of
> the charter.  I think merging it with the terminology draft at this
> point would be premature.
> 
> Bruce
> 
> On 8/21/06, Eunsoo Shim <eunsoo at research.panasonic.com> wrote:
> > I think we need to think about what we look for from documenting use
> cases.
> >
> > In my understanding, the current use case draft focuses on 
> listing all
> > possible (and significant) use cases of P2P SIP. It was an 
> effort to
> > convince people of importance and usefulness of P2P SIP in a 
> sense. I
> > think documenting them has some value at least for a while.
> > Another motivation for the draft was to help in identifying the use
> > cases the group should/want to focus on. I am not sure whether 
> this is
> > critical any more considering that the group made a significant
> progress
> > in defining the work items for the initial charter. I wonder what
> other
> > people think about this.
> >
> > Since we introduced many new terms in the terminology and concept
> draft,
> > there arised a need for illustration of the terms, in 
> particular, the
> > roles of the architectural components. However, an illustration 
> of the
> > role of particular architectural component like the P2PSIP Overlay
> Peer
> > Protocol does not have to depend on details of specific use 
> cases. For
> > example, it does not require to say whether it is used in a 
> corporate> network environment or in the global Internet scale. So 
> I am not sure
> we
> > need to integrate the current use case draft and the terminology and
> > concept draft.
> >
> > What we need is general illusrations of the roles of the 
> architectural> components in example architectures. Fortunately 
> there is already a
> > draft doing it, even though using different terms. The architecture
> > described in draft-shim-sipping-p2p-arch-00.txt is almost the 
> same as
> or
> > at least very close to the concepts in the terminology and concept
> > draft. The architecture draft is already being revised to use 
> the same
> > terms defined in the terminology and concept draft.
> >
> > We might want to keep the terminology and concept draft as a
> collection
> > of the terms and basic concepts with their concise definitions 
> so that
> > it can be referred to in most (possibly all) P2P SIP related drafts.
> And
> > we can collect architecture illustrations in the architecture draft,
> > possibly listing some architecture variations. Some stuff like a 
> data> format for user location can be removed from the 
> architecture draft.
> >
> > The final details of what a particular component MAY/SHOULD/MUST do
> and
> > not do will be described in the protocol specification drafts.
> > Eventually people will come up with lots of creative use cases and
> > architecture variations we don't think of now.
> >
> > My 2 cents.
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Eunsoo
> > Scott W Brim wrote:
> >
> > >On 08/21/2006 10:36 AM, Dean Willis allegedly wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >>I'm amenable, but it is possible that the group might think we
> should
> > >>revise the use cases draft using the language of the concepts and
> > >>terminology draft rather than putting use cases into the concepts
> and
> > >>terminology draft.
> > >>
> > >>What is the "happy medium" here, folks?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >Concepts and terminology make it possible to talk about use 
> cases and
> > >have some confidence that we agree on what they actually mean.  Use
> > >cases clarify the scope and test the C&T to make sure they are 
> useful> >when applied to the real world.  In general for most WGs 
> I think
> these
> > >two should be together in one draft (call it a "framework").  
> You're> >going to be iterating back and forth anyway, since each 
> depends on
> and
> > >supports the other.  I think we should try the experiment of 
> putting> >them all in one draft.  If it turns out to be more 
> confusing than
> > >having them separate, we can easily separate them again.
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >p2p-sip mailing list
> > >p2p-sip at cs.columbia.edu
> > >https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/p2p-sip
> > >
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > p2p-sip mailing list
> > p2p-sip at cs.columbia.edu
> > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/p2p-sip
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> p2p-sip mailing list
> p2p-sip at cs.columbia.edu
> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/p2p-sip
> 
> _______________________________________________
> p2p-sip mailing list
> p2p-sip at cs.columbia.edu
> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/p2p-sip
>