Richard, one of them must provide a WGLC review for the draft. The WG must to due diligence through dedicated reviews to ensure that the work reflects the consensus of the WG.
I will like to see new members to start contributing to the WG, as such while my preference would be for Danny to review the draft and post WGLC comments, I will leave it to the WG members to decide who will review it. I was hesitant to ask Sabine and Jensen since, in all fairness, they have done their share of reviews and comments over the years. I iterate, it would be great if other members of the WG step up to move the work ahead. >From a process point of view, I realize that the cutoff is today so I am expecting that we will not be in time to submit a version. However, that is fine as long as we have a WGLC on the currently submitted draft by the time we have our meeting on Monday, Jul-16. After the meeting, I can do the proto-writeup and move the work ahead. Cheers, On 07/02/2018 09:46 AM, Y. Richard Yang wrote: > Vijay, > > The ideas that I posted were discussed with Sabine, Jensen, and Danny, > who are not co-authors of the document. > > I assume that they are busy today, as 8 pm ET today is IETF draft > deadline. Maybe they can help with our review tomorrow (July 3) or the > day after tomorrow (July 4), before the close :-) > > Thanks! > Richard > > > > On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 9:34 AM Vijay K. Gurbani <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Folks: Following up on Richard's email, we need a dedicated WGLC review > for SSE from the WG. Jan and I will like to invite at least one person > who is not an author to volunteer to review the draft as part of WGLC. > > Thus far, besides Richard's email, there has not been any review or > comments on the draft since it was released for WGLC. We will need to > be more proactive as a WG to move pending work ahead. > > Please send me and Jan a message on whether you are able to perform a > review of the draft in short order so we can move it ahead > expeditiously. > > Thank you, > > On 07/01/2018 10:32 PM, Y. Richard Yang wrote: > > Dear WG, > > > > Thanks a lot for those who already sent comments to the authors! As an > > important service, this document can benefit from in-depth reviews, as > > Vijay pointed out. > > > > The main substantive comment so far is on clarifying the coupling > > between the Update Stream Service (USS), which will be used by the > > network to send SSE Update Messages to a client, and the Update Stream > > Control Service (USCS), which will be used by the client to > control the > > server, by sending add/remove of resources messages. In the current > > design, SSE update messages can provide the final outcome of a control > > request. The comment was whether this is a generic design. > > > > After extensive discussions among the authors, we propose to make the > > following revisions---these revisions will be simple and clean, and if > > approved by the WG, they can be updated right away: > > > > M1. The document clarifies that USS uses a *modular* design, in > that the > > Update Stream Service (USS) is a modular service. Hence, it can be > > controlled by not only USCS but also other potential control channels, > > such as a private control protocol. Hence, the messaging of USS, in > > particular, its Control Update Messages, should be (slightly) > revised to > > reflect this spirit. > > > > M2. The document clarifies that USS uses a self-contained design, to > > take advantage that current design can be simply, elegantly > extended to > > also report error updates. > > > > The authors request that the WG approve these edits so that the > authors > > can proceed to submit a revision shortly, in just a couple days. > > > > Of course, the authors will also wait for other comments, until > the July > > 4th closing, to make a single, coherent edit. > > > > Thank you so much! > > Richard > > > > On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 11:21 AM Vijay K. Gurbani > > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> > wrote: > > > > All: This email announces the WGLC for SSE [1]; the WGLC runs > from Wed, > > Jun 20, 2018 to Wed, Jul 4, 2018. > > > > We will like the community members to perform an in-depth > review of the > > draft and post their comments, concerns or approval to the > mailing list > > during this period, even if it is one liner expressing support for > > moving the draft ahead. > > > > [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-alto-incr-update-sse-11 > > > > Thank you, > > > > - vijay > > -- > > Vijay K. Gurbani / [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> > > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > > Network Data Science, Nokia Networks > > Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq > > > > _______________________________________________ > > alto mailing list > > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto > > > > > > - vijay > -- > Vijay K. Gurbani / [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> > Network Data Science, Nokia Networks > Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq > > > > -- > -- > ===================================== > | 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 _______________________________________________ alto mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
