Re: [sacm] GitHub Issue Tracking: 2015-08-07

"Jim Schaad" <ietf@augustcellars.com> Fri, 07 August 2015 17:02 UTC

From: Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com>
To: "'Adam W. Montville'" <adam.w.montville@gmail.com>, sacm@ietf.org
References: <E9EFE38C-D65C-42A1-9EB9-A383BD242068@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <E9EFE38C-D65C-42A1-9EB9-A383BD242068@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 07 Aug 2015 10:03:16 -0700
Message-ID: <0a2001d0d132$f4be5a30$de3b0e90$@augustcellars.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A21_01D0D0F8.48617E00"
Content-Language: en-us
Thread-Index: AQGqCd1802dApWKsARy2qxoYdY5rvZ5OUffw
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sacm/KhZ8X9uHjAkjB6_hs8o_9KL-88w>
Subject: Re: [sacm] GitHub Issue Tracking: 2015-08-07
Precedence: list

 

I do not believe that this discussion needs to stop a WGLC.  I basically did my review because I was expecting a WGLC so they could all be treated as WGCL comments.

 

Jim

 

From: sacm [mailto:sacm-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Adam W. Montville
Sent: Friday, August 07, 2015 4:30 AM
To: <sacm@ietf.org>
Subject: [sacm] GitHub Issue Tracking: 2015-08-07

 

Hi.

 

I’ve updated our GitHub issue tracking here: https://tools.ietf.org/wg/sacm/trac/wiki/SacmGitHubIssueStats.  There are four outstanding issues [1][2][3][4] for the Requirements draft, which we were hoping to get into WGLC soon.  

 

It seems that [1] requires a few other reviewers.  If you have five minutes, please review the following text taken from the Requirements draft and comment on [1]:

 

DM-006  Provider Identification: The interfaces and actions in the
    data model MUST include the ability to identify data from a specific
    provider.  For example, a SACM consumer should be able to request
    all data to come from a specific provider (e.g.  Provider A) as
    there can be a larger set of providers.

 

[2] and [3] appear to be nits for the draft authors to fix.

 

[4] poses a question about whether the Requirements draft should address privacy considerations.  If you have a minute, please review the thread at [4] and opine.  If you’re further inclined, offer some suggestions for improvement (i.e. provide text, even if it’s just a start at something).

 

Thanks for your time today - hope you all have a great weekend!

 

Adam

 

 

[1] https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/59

[2] https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/58

[3] https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/57

[4] https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/55

[sacm] GitHub Issue Tracking: 2015-08-07 Adam W. Montville
Re: [sacm] GitHub Issue Tracking: 2015-08-07 Jim Schaad