Rich, all, Splitting out the redistribution mechanism out of the base protocol is a good idea, especially if no one implemented and tested it yet.
This would indeed also give the chance to use the more advanced jose mechanisms. Martin [email protected] NEC Laboratories Europe - Network Research Division NEC Europe Limited | Registered Office: NEC House, 1 Victoria Road, London W3 6BL | Registered in England 2832014 > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > Richard Alimi > Sent: Monday, November 14, 2011 2:32 AM > To: Martin Stiemerling > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [alto] Work related to ALTO at IETF82 > > One way forward is to split out Section 8 (redistribution) of > draft-ietf-alto-protocol into a separate document as an extension, and > only the extension would be blocked on the JOSE WG. Given that this > part was not implemented by anyone at the interop event (to my > knowledge -- please correct me if I'm wrong) event and there is more > than enough in the base protocol to get this working for the large > majority of use cases. > > Thanks, > Rich > > On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 6:52 PM, Martin Stiemerling > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Enrico, > > > > I have a question about the jose WG: > > Is this something the ALTO protocol should consider right now? > > > > I see that this makes technically sense, but we would add a dependency to > > jose, if we add this to the ALTO protocol right now. > > > > The public of the ALTO protocol would delayed, until the corresponding draft > > in jose would be published. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Martin > > > > On 11/11/2011 03:56 PM, Enrico Marocco wrote: > >> > >> Hi all, > >> > >> people involved in ALTO may also want to attend -- physically or > >> remotely -- a bunch of other meetings next week that have related topics > >> on the agenda. Here's a non-inclusive list: > >> > >> - appsawg, 9:00-11:30 on Monday, will have a WG report from ALTO to the > >> benefit of the app-review team the ALTO specs will be run on, and a > >> discussion about a patch mechanism for JSON (draft-pbryan-json-patch) > >> that may be reused in the ALTO protocol for providing incremental > >> updates; > >> > >> - jose WG, 13:00-15:00 on Monday, will have its first meeting. The WG > >> is chartered to specify an integrity protection mechanism the ALTO > >> protocol may -- and in fact should -- use for information > >> redistribution. It will be important to bring the ALTO perspective to > >> make sure that relevant use cases are properly addressed; > >> > >> - cdni WG, 9:00-11:30 on Wednesday, other than being fundamentally > >> related, has an ALTO-based proposal being presented > >> (draft-seedorf-alto-for-cdni) as a candidate for the request routing > >> interface the WG is chartered to specify. > >> > >> Other sessions that will likely have discussions about ALTO-related > >> topics are decade, ppsp and sdn (BoF). And certainly a ton that I have > >> forgotten and that someone will promptly point out on this list :-) > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> alto mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto > > > > _______________________________________________ > > alto mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto > > > _______________________________________________ > alto mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto _______________________________________________ alto mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
