Re: [storm] [tsv-area] Application protocol for distributed storage

[Wesley Leggette <[e-mail]>]

Joe,

Thank you ;)

I should start by saying that at this point we have a fully implemented and
working product, so our overall goal is to sufficiently describe it to allow
third-party implementations.

This being said, our current installation base allows for some flexibility
so it is my hope that by submitting a protocol specification for review we
can receive constructive criticism which will make it easier and more
practical for others to implement our protocol.

My initial plan was to finish an initial draft of our transport and security
protocols. This email was sent to determine if and where an appropriate
working group exists which would be interested in reviewing such a thing.

However, I see your point and so I suppose the best approach would be to
attempt, when I submit something, to explain clearly the design goals and
requirements that led us to go the route we did?

When we are ready to submit something (it would be a submission which
documents what we have currently implemented) is there a working group that
would be appropriate, or should we just submit an I-D directly?


Wesley Leggette
Cleversafe, Inc.



On 1/15/10 10:17, "Joe Touch" <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Wesley,
> 
> It seems to me that your first review just came in ;-). I.e., it would
> be useful to indicate the extent to which your current docs address how
> existing protocols were not sufficient.
> 
> If they don't yet do this, then that would appear to be a useful next step.
> 
> Beyond that, what is the purpose of this review? I would expect that
> useful aspects of your protocol could be incorporated into standards
> track protocols under development, or that a new protocol
> (informational, experimental, or standards track) could be established
> based on your protocol. Can you address what your goals are?
> 
> Joe