Re: [SAM] draft-kolberg-sam-baseline-protocol-00

Gustavo Carneiro <gjcarneiro@gmail.com> Thu, 08 April 2010 12:37 UTC

Return-Path: <gjcarneiro@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: sam@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sam@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65B5028C13B for <sam@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 Apr 2010 05:37:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.184
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.184 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.185, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HnYo+ebovtaQ for <sam@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 Apr 2010 05:37:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-fx0-f218.google.com (mail-fx0-f218.google.com [209.85.220.218]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D28528C130 for <sam@irtf.org>; Thu, 8 Apr 2010 05:37:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by fxm10 with SMTP id 10so1730300fxm.7 for <sam@irtf.org>; Thu, 08 Apr 2010 05:36:55 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:received:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=vGgPw7Bb/N0Vok0qwQA441eGeXh8/GMJhRddF4LE2Ok=; b=c4PvVOKwcxhgB5tR+8EF6oQBhEWMKCDYaPh3CSDtzK2cpwIMXLjTC0AOE/UXEIixWH lRtZzNFnjNmn7QAxgLJtqhKeXDf8hlYeMIaOhO5b/oh8i+5+T5aX1TP3AyI795LLGCCX vqiNLZGmD7RJB9qajn1QGZu3PMArVCNYwlv5Y=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=ulO9R+oFCEmh9JO+J/9O94Awu9atG+I20SLPlxXIgChWdkVrMtp+WPwQ1Vojsq8AfF iqbb7P5Krj4aPZ+9D9041519Yt6hM9bIAv3MLKOob6tTx94DTNiaMrgjWwfaR8aCFD+j yL+bg7WYLwznb8xSdfqpl/Y+nl9cxdLZF6ReI=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.239.149.129 with HTTP; Thu, 8 Apr 2010 05:36:55 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4BBDA42D.8000602@cs.stir.ac.uk>
References: <y2wa467ca4f1004071054v35602b3axacd6b774e16da524@mail.gmail.com> <4BBDA42D.8000602@cs.stir.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2010 13:36:55 +0100
Received: by 10.239.187.212 with SMTP id m20mr9725hbh.51.1270730215474; Thu, 08 Apr 2010 05:36:55 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <u2va467ca4f1004080536uae4fcefbv5f2cb130fd093cfc@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gustavo Carneiro <gjcarneiro@gmail.com>
To: sam@irtf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001485f7d24019467e0483b8ef3e"
Subject: Re: [SAM] draft-kolberg-sam-baseline-protocol-00
X-BeenThere: sam@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "For use by members of the Scalable Adaptive Multicast \(SAM\) RG" <sam.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/sam>, <mailto:sam-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/sam>
List-Post: <mailto:sam@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sam-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/sam>, <mailto:sam-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2010 12:37:03 -0000

On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 10:38 AM, Dr Mario Kolberg <mko@cs.stir.ac.uk> wrote:

> Dear Gustavo,
>
> many thanks for your comments.
>
>
>  Another not so clear item is how the API in Sec. 5 articulates with Sec.
>> 6.  Sec.6 starts like this:
>>
>>    In this document we define messages for hybrid overlay multicast
>>    tree creation...
>>
>>
>> I get the feeling this used to be a separate draft that was converted to a
>> section of another draft.  I suppose that the Protocol described is
>> triggered by API calls of the Sec. 5 API, but I get the feeling I am
>> guessing what should be explicitly stated in the document.  In that sense,
>> draft-waehlisch-sam-common-api-02 (Fig. 2) is clearer.
>>
>
> Yes section 5 is the API to the application, whereas section 6 describes
> the API between nodes. And yes this draft is based on a number of previous
> drafts. The aim is to align them and to form a base document for the WG. I
> accept there is still some work to be done.
>

OK, that is understandable in the first versions.

Still I was wondering if the plan is for the sam-common-api will continue to
evolve alongside sam-baseline-protocol, or whether it will be merged
into sam-baseline-protocol.

Many thanks for your answers (Matthias as well).

Regards,

-- 
Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro
INESC Porto, UTM, WiN, http://win.inescporto.pt/gjc
"The universe is always one step beyond logic." -- Frank Herbert