Re: [Storagesync] Storagesync Digest, Vol 5, Issue 1

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015, at 08:20 AM, Linhui Sun wrote:
> Hi
>
> 2015-12-02 5:14 GMT+08:00 Hugo González Labrador
> <ietf@hugo.labkode.com>:
>> Hi,
>>
>>
from my point of view the remoteStorage project addresses a subset of
>>
the use cases of the  WebDAV specification.
>>
>>
The main difference I can observe is that the specification is built on
>>
REST instead of XML-based communication.
>>
>>
I personally like much more REST than WebDAV because it is more
>>
developer friendly and it is faster to develop.
>>
Maybe the remoteStorage API becomes the next WebDAV :)
>>
>>
However, the remoteStorage API does not provide a way of synchronising
>>
data, this task is delegated to the developers.
>>
Is there a plan to provide such feature based on the outcome of this
>>
draft?
> I'm a little bit confused why you say the remoteStorage does not
> provide that. Is that because remoteStorage does not perform like
> a typical sync services (e.g. dropbox...) or you are saying
> something else?
Yes, because it does not offer synchronisation capabilities.
>>
>>
BTW, I want to introduce ClawIO (http://clawio.github.io), a research
>>
project to benchmark different synchronisation protocols against
>>
different data backends with special attention to provide a common sync
>>
API.
>>
>>
A common API for different sync protocols is being created based on the
>>
architecture specified in this draft (control and data servers) and the
> I cannot find a distributed architecture in this draft. It seems that
> they handle metadata and content data together, just like a normal web
> service.

ClawIO is fully distributed. Every logical unit is a different server
than be scaled out. Data and Metadata channels are independent from each
other and reside on different servers.

> Regards, Linhui
>> one from the CERN EOS project (management, disk and queue servers).
>>
>>
The Phase I has implemented the ownCloud Sync Protocol and Phase II will
>>
implement the SeaFile Sync Protocol.
>>
The choice of these protocols among others is because they are really
>>
opposed to each other in terms of syncing (delta vs non-delta,
>>
state-based vs log/event/git-based sync …), so finding a common approach
>>
is more challenging.
>>
>>
Providing a base specification/architecture to measure the feasibility
>>
of this draft is one of the objectives of the project.
>>
>>
I believe that the work being done here and in ClawIO are supplementary
>>
to each other and I think mutual collaboration could be beneficial for
>>
both sides.
>>
>>
Also, if there is interest, the remoteStorage API can be added to
>>
ClawIO.
>>
>>
Best regards,
>>
>>
Hugo Gonzalez Labrador
>>
>>
On Tue, Dec 1, 2015, at 09:00 PM, storagesync-request@ietf.org wrote:
>>
> Send Storagesync mailing list submissions to
>>
>storagesync@ietf.org
>>
>
>>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/storagesync
>>
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>
>storagesync-request@ietf.org
>>
>
>>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>>
>storagesync-owner@ietf.org
>>
>
>>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>>
> than "Re: Contents of Storagesync digest..."
>>
> Today's Topics:
>>
>
>>
>1. New version of draft-dejong-remotestorage    Internet-Draft
>>
>available (Michiel de Jong)
>>
>2. Re: New version of draft-dejong-remotestorage Internet-Draft
>>
>available (Gihan Dias)
>>
>3. Re: New version of draft-dejong-remotestorage Internet-Draft
>>
>available (Fei Song)
>>
> _______________________________________________
>>
> Storagesync mailing list
>>
> Storagesync@ietf.org
>>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/storagesync
>>
> Email had 3 attachments:
>>
> + [Storagesync] New version of draft-dejong-remotestorage
>>
> Internet-Draft available
>>
>2k (message/rfc822)
>>
> + Re: [Storagesync] New version of draft-dejong-remotestorage
>>
> Internet-Draft available
>>
>1k (message/rfc822)
>>
> + Re: [Storagesync] New version of draft-dejong-remotestorage
>>
> Internet-Draft available
>>
>2k (message/rfc822)
>>
>>
_______________________________________________
>>
Storagesync mailing list
>> Storagesync@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/storagesync