Subject: [alto] Question about unified framework for properties

From: Lingli Deng <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2015 06:54:25 +0000

Hi Wendy,
I am currently working on a revision for draft on Extended endpoint properties (I.D-draft-deng-alto-p2p-ext),  and noticed there is concern about potential overlap during last meeting with your proposal on a unified framework for properties.I am afraid that I was not there for the onsite discussion, but after reading your slides, I feel it seems to be orthogonal with endpoint properties. What do you think?BTW, I could not find any draft for the proposed framework. Are you working on such a document or is there anybody else doing this? If so, I would be happy to read it and double check its relevance with or effect on our work on endpoint properties.
Regards,Lingli

---

From: Wendy Roome <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2015 11:28:37 -0400

Lingli,

My "Unified Approach To Properties" proposal was independent of yours: you
proposed new properties, I proposed a new framework for accessing
properties. The two proposals complement each other, rather than compete
with each other.

I have not filed a draft for it, though. I came up with the idea too late to
submit a formal draft for Dallas, so I just presented the slides.
Unfortunately, the audience's response was less enthusiastic than I had
hoped, and it seemed like there were other more pressing issues, so I did
not bother to formalize the proposal with a draft.

But I still think it is a good idea. If anyone thinks this is worth
pursuing, please let me know!

- Wendy Roome

From:  Lingli Deng <[email-masked]>
Date:  Wed, June 3, 2015 at 02:54
To:  Wendy Roome <[email-masked]>
Cc:  "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>
Subject:  Question about unified framework for properties

Hi Wendy,

I am currently working on a revision for draft on Extended endpoint
properties (I.D-draft-deng-alto-p2p-ext),  and noticed there is concern
about potential overlap during last meeting with your proposal on a unified
framework for properties.
I am afraid that I was not there for the onsite discussion, but after
reading your slides, I feel it seems to be orthogonal with endpoint
properties. What do you think?
BTW, I could not find any draft for the proposed framework. Are you working
on such a document or is there anybody else doing this? If so, I would be
happy to read it and double check its relevance with or effect on our work
on endpoint properties.

Regards,
Lingli

---

From: "Y. Richard Yang" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2015 11:51:40 -0400

Wendy,

Just to add to the discussion. I found a unified framework highly appealing
and your proposal is a great starting point! I support that we develop it
formally.

Richard

On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 11:28 AM, Wendy Roome <[email-masked]>
wrote:

> I have not filed a draft for it, though. I came up with the idea too late
> to submit a formal draft for Dallas, so I just presented the slides.
> BTW, I could not find any draft for the proposed framework. Are you
> working on such a document or is there anybody else doing this? If so, I
> would be happy to read it and double check its relevance with or effect on
> our work on endpoint properties.
>
> Regards,
> Lingli
>
> _______________________________________________
> alto mailing list
> [email-masked]
>
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_alto&d=AwICAg&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=4G36iiEVb2m_v-0RnP2gx9KZJjYQgfvrOCE3789JGIA&m=T9W7BQ0EZITsYhWxd-okJBl7h5D-yhmL6cTKv4g42vo&s=O6_Q7MWf6RW0VE96kzvDxJjZNcinC9UgawBB06ruTiE&e=
>

---

From: Lingli Deng <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2015 03:22:57 +0000

Hi Wendy,
Thanks for the clarification. I agree with you that the two are complementary to each other.BTW, please let me know if you decide to work on drafting such a framework, I would be happy to read it.
Regards,Lingli 

Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2015 11:28:37 -0400
Subject: Re: Question about unified framework for properties
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
CC: [email-masked]

Lingli,
My "Unified Approach To Properties" proposal was independent of yours: you proposed new properties, I proposed a new framework for accessing properties. The two proposals complement each other, rather than compete with each other.
I have not filed a draft for it, though. I came up with the idea too late to submit a formal draft for Dallas, so I just presented the slides. Unfortunately, the audience's response was less enthusiastic than I had hoped, and it seemed like there were other more pressing issues, so I did not bother to formalize the proposal with a draft.
But I still think it is a good idea. If anyone thinks this is worth pursuing, please let me know!
	- Wendy Roome
From:  Lingli Deng <[email-masked]>
Date:  Wed, June 3, 2015 at 02:54
To:  Wendy Roome <[email-masked]>
Cc:  "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>
Subject:  Question about unified framework for properties

Hi Wendy,