Jan, Stefano, Colleagues, On 28 Apr 2011, at 16:30, Jan Medved wrote: > On 4/28/11 2:58 AM, "stefano previdi" <[email protected]> wrote: >> splitting the current alto-cdn document makes sense to me and we >> need to define: >> a. use cases >> b. requirements >> c. proposed solutions > > This seems to be most logical split. >
Agreed. >> >> your draft addresses the use cases and you may want to merge the >> use cases sections we currently have in the alto-cdn draft so to >> focus that one only on the proposed solution(s). > > The first two uses cases in draft-jenkins-cdn-use-cases are described in > draft-penno-alto-cdn. Agreed that the text from draft-penno-alto-cdn > should be merged into the appropriate sections of > draft-jenkins-cdn-use-cases. I'm OK with that. When I read draft-penno-alto-cdn I found it hard to extract text that is pure use case though but if you could provide text or pointers to sections I'm happy to start discussing how we could merge the use case text in draft-penno-alto-cdn with that in draft-jenkins-alto-cdn-use-cases. >> The question is about requirements: do we want to include them >> in one of the two drafts or into a separate document ? My opinion is that the requirements should be documented separately to the solutions. I don't currently have a strong opinion about whether they should be documented in draft-jenkins-alto-cdn-use-cases or a separate draft. Ben _______________________________________________ alto mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
