IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [ppsp] Problem Statement and Requirements Drafts

ZongNing <zongning@huawei.com> Tue, 17 January 2012 00:28 UTC

Return-Path: <zongning@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: ppsp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ppsp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9350C21F86E1 for <ppsp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Jan 2012 16:28:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.449
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 xoAmFqG0cw2T for <ppsp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Jan 2012 16:28:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from szxga03-in.huawei.com (szxga03-in.huawei.com [119.145.14.66]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C877D21F861E for <ppsp@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Jan 2012 16:28:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from huawei.com (szxga03-in [172.24.2.9]) by szxga03-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LXX00F5O2NZVI@szxga03-in.huawei.com> for ppsp@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Jan 2012 08:28:47 +0800 (CST)
Received: from szxrg02-dlp.huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxga03-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LXX00DTE2NZKK@szxga03-in.huawei.com> for ppsp@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Jan 2012 08:28:47 +0800 (CST)
Received: from szxeml202-edg.china.huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.1.9-GA) with ESMTP id AGI73300; Tue, 17 Jan 2012 08:28:22 +0800
Received: from SZXEML421-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.160) by szxeml202-edg.china.huawei.com (172.24.2.42) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Tue, 17 Jan 2012 08:28:18 +0800
Received: from SZXEML504-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.4.7]) by szxeml421-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.82.67.160]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Tue, 17 Jan 2012 08:28:15 +0800
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 00:28:14 +0000
From: ZongNing <zongning@huawei.com>
In-reply-to: <E84E7B8FF3F2314DA16E48EC89AB49F024EED689@PALLENE.office.hd>
X-Originating-IP: [10.138.41.128]
To: Martin Stiemerling <Martin.Stiemerling@neclab.eu>, "ppsp@ietf.org" <ppsp@ietf.org>
Message-id: <B0D29E0424F2DE47A0B36779EC666779148B0219@szxeml504-mbx.china.huawei.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-language: zh-CN
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN
Thread-topic: Problem Statement and Requirements Drafts
Thread-index: AczUNuUUuPEbDTLMT9KQ/MDodwxcCwAd7UHw
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
References: <E84E7B8FF3F2314DA16E48EC89AB49F024EED689@PALLENE.office.hd>
Subject: Re: [ppsp] Problem Statement and Requirements Drafts
X-BeenThere: ppsp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: discussing to draw up peer to peer streaming protocol <ppsp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ppsp>, <mailto:ppsp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ppsp>
List-Post: <mailto:ppsp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ppsp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ppsp>, <mailto:ppsp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 00:28:49 -0000

I don't have problem with merging these two drafts.

-----Original Message-----
From: ppsp-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ppsp-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Martin Stiemerling
Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 9:09 PM
To: ppsp@ietf.org
Subject: [ppsp] Problem Statement and Requirements Drafts

Dear all, 

The authors of draft-ietf-ppsp-problem-statement have received a number of comments from the IESG. You can see the comments here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ppsp-problem-statement/ballot/

An important reoccurring question from the members of the IESG is about the scope of the document and if such a document is still needed. The general answer, at least in my opinion, is that such document is need as it writes down the challenges and the environments in which a p2p streaming should operate. 

With respect to the requirements document: This has not yet made it to the IESG, but we received some comments that the document is rather small. This is not judging the technical quality. 

However, our AD recommended merging the problem statement and requirements documents into a single document, in order to be more comprehensive. 

Now the question to the WG:
Are there any objections to merge the problem statement draft and requirements draft into a single document comprising both?
The merged version would also address the comments received for the problem statement during the IESG review.

Please let us know your opinion and comments until January 23rd. 

  Martin

martin.stiemerling@neclab.eu

NEC Laboratories Europe - Network Research Division NEC Europe Limited | Registered Office: NEC House, 1 Victoria Road, London W3 6BL | Registered in England 2832014 


_______________________________________________
ppsp mailing list
ppsp@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ppsp

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email