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 protected]> Date: Wed, June 3, 2015 at 02:54 To: Wendy Roome <[email protected]> Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> 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
_______________________________________________ alto mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
