As much as I would like to see the graph representation (using the new terms that Greg, Wendy, and I are recently using, Path Vector and/or Graph representation), starting with a survey is a quite reasonable idea. But I hope that it is not limited to only an informational survey, and a couple slides showing what the format might look like can be helpful.
Richard On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 4:01 PM, Vijay K. Gurbani <[email protected]> wrote: > On 02/17/2014 02:39 PM, Leeyoung wrote: > >> Hi Vijay, >> >> I read your agenda page you just published. I read the following as one >> of the agenda: >> >> (Informational) A survey of techniques to formalize the structure >> of a network graph (that can derived from a set of related ALTO >> network and cost maps) in a format that would facilitate advanced >> graph computation. Such survey will cover both models used in >> popular open-source software (e.g. NetworkX, Blueprints) and models >> being considered in other working groups (e.g. netmod, i2rs). (18') >> >> Have the WG already decided this item to be just informational not on >> standard track? >> I thought the mailing discussions in the last few weeks show that there >> are >> Sufficient interests and willingness to work on this item. >> > > Young: The interest and willingness to work is precisely why it is on > the list of work items! Whether this turns out to be Informational, > Standards track or Experimental is yet to be determined; the track on > the agenda is merely where discussions start. > > Clearly, the discussion we had on the list lead to an understanding > that this is a sufficiently complex topic that any pithy attempt to > characterize it merely for the sake of "doing something" will not be > valued as much as a reasoned attempt to catalogue what is missing from > the current models to represent graphs. Once we have such a > distinction, it becomes relatively easy to figure out how to close > the gap. > > Should we blithely put a deliverable of "Graph representation and > dynamic graph transformation techniques", I suspect that there will be > some push back from the IESG on exactly what this means, considering > that even among us there is some trepidation that we should do the > easy part (graph representation) first before tackling the hard > part (graph transformation). Remember, the charter is produced by > the BoF/WG but has to be accepted by the IESG. As such, taking a > nuanced approach by understanding the missing pieces first appears to > make sense, no? > > We will discuss this some more during London, of course. > > Cheers, > > > - vijay > -- > Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent > 1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA) > Email: vkg@{bell-labs.com,acm.org} / [email protected] > Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq > > _______________________________________________ > alto mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto > -- -- ===================================== | Y. Richard Yang <[email protected]> | | Professor of Computer Science | | http://www.cs.yale.edu/~yry/ | =====================================
_______________________________________________ alto mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
