Kerim: Great, thanks a lot for volunteering. Please post your review on the WG email list.
I suspect that you are getting acquainted with IETF processes; in that vein, here's some quick advice that I hope will help you as you perform a WGLC. A WGLC covers the entire I-D, you can point out anything in the draft that you feel needs to be improved. Generally speaking, every reviewer has their own style of performing WGLC reviews, you can see some examples here [1, 2]. However, all reviews should include issues that are 'major' (needs attention of author AND WG to moving the work ahead), minor (may only need the attention of author to clarify things), and 'nits' (needs attention of authors only). It is okay if one or more of these categories is empty, however, due diligence must be done to ensure that there were indeed no issues to raise under that particular category. [1] https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/alto/current/msg03581.html [2] https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/alto/current/msg03513.html Cheers, On 07/02/2018 05:30 PM, Kerim Gokarslan wrote: > Hi Vijay, > > I talked with Richard and I would like to help with a review. > > Regards, > Kerim Gokarslan > > On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 3:12 PM, Y. Richard Yang <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Dear WG, > > The authors have gone ahead to fix the coupling issue between update > stream and stream control. To allow the community to read what the > document reads like, we have uploaded the newer version, which can > be found at: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-incr-update-sse/ > <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-incr-update-sse/> > Please see version 12. > > It is a much cleaner, modular, complete design. Last-call feedbacks, > of course, are still highly appreciated and the authors will update > as soon as possible, to improve on reactiveness. > > Thanks a lot! > Richard > > > On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 11:09 AM Vijay K. Gurbani > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > 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]> > > <mailto:[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]>> > > <mailto:[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 > <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]>> > > > <mailto:[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]>> > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto > <https://www.ietf..org/mailman/listinfo/alto> > > > > > > > > > > - 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 > > > > > > > > -- > > -- > > ===================================== > > | Y. Richard Yang <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> | > > | Professor of Computer Science | > > | http://www.cs.yale.edu/~yry/ | > > ===================================== > > - 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/ | > ===================================== > > _______________________________________________ > alto mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto > <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto> > > - 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
