IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

fsong@bjtu.edu.cn Thu, 03 December 2015 09:14 UTC

Return-Path: <fsong@bjtu.edu.cn>
X-Original-To: storagesync@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: storagesync@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3166D1B3330 for <storagesync@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 01:14:13 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.789
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.789 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_PSBL=2.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id REZZ8S1_CmMJ for <storagesync@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 01:14:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from bjtu.edu.cn (mail.bjtu.edu.cn [218.249.29.198]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D57B71B333A for <storagesync@ietf.org>; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 01:13:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: by ajax-webmail-Jdweb4 (Coremail) ; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 17:15:27 +0800 (GMT+08:00)
Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2015 17:15:27 +0800
From: fsong@bjtu.edu.cn
To: Linhui Sun <lh.sunlinh@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <6e37a6c8.2c11.151671ffb15.Coremail.fsong@bjtu.edu.cn>
In-Reply-To: <CAO_YprZQCbVgYKZRKqqfHBMJK9NuKGA7rZZ1UeZFFGU78p=eRw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <mailman.108.1449000023.26068.storagesync@ietf.org> <1449004445.2745758.455126129.5028FD2B@webmail.messagingengine.com> <CAO_YprZhCmUxEf=aGCYL=+CLbjUoD1ifpDFsrS7N40Npo4wr+w@mail.gmail.com> <1449050174.3667910.455617161.12EEE3C5@webmail.messagingengine.com> <1449051540970-b577e6c2-393e54ef-bbe05be4@gmail.com> <1449052128.3674794.455635937.667C3E1F@webmail.messagingengine.com> <CAPpPfeAdrCZcsYZo7=W6N14K4F2LutXN8BFTetikzKZSr8+vVA@mail.gmail.com> <1449060218.3721231.455737161.5D657D6D@webmail.messagingengine.com> <CAO_YprYp+cdCPQ1pEUJLcCh0uQL_mu-Y=MJOA7Oh92TWrM_tWQ@mail.gmail.com> <1449061417.3729762.455755681.08D95D5B@webmail.messagingengine.com> <CAO_Ypra_PWf0Uxt2Rbp_k49hDdjq1zvTQs9qkeZqRo0v0E3+=g@mail.gmail.com> <CAPpPfeDeaTDUqNuQtiTwtWvf_3uUXNY6DTUOeRbOokf6En408A@mail.gmail.com> <a448d31.2b40.1516700150f.Coremail.fsong@bjtu.edu.cn> <CAO_YprZQCbVgYKZRKqqfHBMJK9NuKGA7rZZ1UeZFFGU78p=eRw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_41428_1478054699.1449134127891"
X-Originating-IP: [106.2.233.19]
X-Priority: 3
X-Mailer: Coremail Webmail Server Version XT2.1.11 dev build 20150107(58648.7033.6860) Copyright (c) 2002-2015 www.mailtech.cn bjtu
X-SendMailWithSms: false
X-CM-TRANSID: eJ5wygDHqR4vCGBWWbgFAA--.2202W
X-CM-SenderInfo: aytwlqpemw3hxhgxhubq/1tbiAQIMB1R9XjYZnAACsO
X-Coremail-Antispam: 1Ur529EdanIXcx71UUUUU7IcSsGvfJ3iIAIbVAYjsxI4VWxJw CS07vEb4IE77IF4wCS07vE1I0E4x80FVAKz4kxMIAIbVAFxVCaYxvI4VCIwcAKzIAtYxBI daVFxhVjvjDU=
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/storagesync/nIr3QPlvWw5gdG7pwuWP9ysKePg>
Cc: storagesync <storagesync@ietf.org>, Hugo González Labrador <ietf@hugo.labkode.com>, Michiel de Jong <mbdejong@mozilla.com>, fkooman <fkooman@tuxed.net>
Subject: Re: [Storagesync] Storagesync Digest, Vol 5, Issue 1
X-BeenThere: storagesync@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mechanisms to synchronize client file systems with Internet-based data storage services <storagesync.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/storagesync>, <mailto:storagesync-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/storagesync/>
List-Post: <mailto:storagesync@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:storagesync-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/storagesync>, <mailto:storagesync-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2015 09:14:13 -0000

Hi Linhui,

 

Thanks for asking! Maybe I didn’t express clearly. I think MOVE is good and more useful for synchronization.

But if this draft only want to identify the basic elements for remoteStorage and look for the minimum set, MOVE should be further investigated.

After all, it can be replaced by DEL + UPLOAD.




-----原始邮件-----
发件人: "Linhui Sun" <lh.sunlinh@gmail.com>
发送时间: 2015年12月3日 星期四
收件人: fsong <fsong@bjtu.edu.cn>
抄送: storagesync <storagesync@ietf.org>, fkooman <fkooman@tuxed.net>, "Michiel de Jong" <mbdejong@mozilla.com>, "Hugo González Labrador" <ietf@hugo.labkode.com>
主题: Re: [Storagesync] Storagesync Digest, Vol 5, Issue 1






2015-12-03 16:40 GMT+08:00 <fsong@bjtu.edu.cn>:


Hi Michael,

 

Based on the description on http://remotestorage.io/ “remoteStorage-enabled apps automatically sync your data across all of your devices”.

 

However, there is no synchronization in the abstract.

“The protocol supports storing, retrieving, and removing individual documents, as well as listing the contents of an individual folder, and access control is based on bearer tokens”

 

Therefore, I think:

If synchronization is added into abstract, the MOVE action should be added for sure.

If synchronization is not included, like current version, the basic actions in draft are enough.

I don't know why MOVE should be tied to the “synchronization”. It seems that only sync allows MOVE to be used.


Regards,
Linhui

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email