Hi Vijay, all
On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 11:03 AM Vijay K. Gurbani <[email protected]> wrote: > Dawn: Yes, pipelining is another good reason to send the response in > the update stream control service. > > This, and the other reasons I indicate in a different thread [1] > makes me prefer option 2. > > +1 Richard > [1] https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/alto/current/msg03687.html > > Cheers, > > On 06/11/2018 03:47 AM, Dawn Chan wrote: > > Hi Vijay, > > > > Thanks for the reply, it is a good point that the result should also be > sent in the update stream service. > > > > Besides, there is another point that the result should also be sent in > the update stream service. If the server process requests asynchronously, > when it receives the request from the client and insert it in its queue, it > will first send a response back to the client; and after the server > successfully processed the request, it will send a reply via the update > stream service. This case requires the server to indicate the state of the > “remove” operation in the reply. A simple attribute “state” with type JSON > boolean in the UpdateStream ControlEvent can solve the concern. If "state" > is false, the operation fails; if "state" is true, the operation succeeds.. > > > > object { > > [String control-uri;] > > [Boolean state;] > > [String remove<1..*>;] > > } UpdateStreamControlEvent; > > > > This is my idea for option 2. > > > > Wish to hear opinions from others in the group. > > > > Best Wishes, > > Dawn > > > > ________________________________________ > > From: alto <[email protected]> on behalf of Y. Richard Yang < > [email protected]> > > Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2018 3:57:14 AM > > To: Gurbani, Vijay (Nokia - US) > > Cc: IETF ALTO > > Subject: Re: [alto] Need to move SSE to WGLC, but ... > > > > Dear Vijay, Jan, > > > > Thank you so much. It is a wonderful idea to check the WG for additional > comments on the mentioned issues. The authors will address suggestions, if > any, and then move the document forward. > > > > Thanks! > > Richard > > > > On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 11:04 AM Vijay K. Gurbani < > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Folks: Jan and I would like to move SSE [1] to WGLC. > > > > Looking at the mailing list, we note that the authors are asking input > > from the WG on an issue in SSE [2]. > > > > We would kindly request the WG to spend some time thinking about the > > question being asked in [2] and to chime in with some thoughts. > > > > Assuming that there is no response by next week on this, the authors can > > proceed with their default position on this, for which they have an > > articulated reason in [2]. > > > > Jan and I will follow up next week and if there has not been any further > > list discussion on this, we will move the work ahead to WGLC. > > > > [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-incr-update-sse/ > > [2] https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/alto/current/msg03684.html > > > > Thanks, > > > > - vijay > > -- > > Vijay K. Gurbani / [email protected]<mailto: > [email protected]> > > Network Data Science, Nokia Networks > > Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq > > > > _______________________________________________ > > alto mailing list > > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto > > > > > > -- > > -- > > ===================================== > > | Y. Richard Yang <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> | > > | Professor of Computer Science | > > | http://www.cs.yale.edu/~yry/ | > > ===================================== > > > > - vijay > -- > Vijay K. Gurbani / [email protected] > Network Data Science, Nokia Networks > Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq > -- -- ===================================== | 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
