Alia;  I tend to think of what you've described as applicability and
requirements.  A framework would, IMO, include some set of underlying
primitives, mechanisms or structures that would form the basis for an
extensible architecture.

Having said that, there's clearly a lot of variation in the way these terms
are used;  I'm ok with 'high level architecture', although I agree with
Noel that it's a bit tautological.


On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 7:52 AM, Alia Atlas <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> It wouldn't make me apoplectic - but I think we have some understanding of
> what
> is meant by "architecture" and "framework" in the context of i2rs.
>
> The individual framework draft talks about desired aspects of the i2rs
> solution and the
> scope of interfaces that are intended.  An architecture draft, to my mind,
> would
> talk about the different entities using i2rs, the interactions with
> different protocols,
> and how i2rs can be used in different, well, architectures - so that
> Dmitri's draft
> is a very preliminary step in that direction.
>
> Thus - the framework is the skeleton of what is desired and required in
> i2rs, giving the
> scope and reasoning.   Perhaps it should turn into a requirements draft?
>
> Alia
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 8:16 AM, Adrian Farrel <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> One of the ADs doing a final review of the draft charter is struggling
>> with the
>> difference or overlap between 'architecture' and 'framework'. In response
>> to a
>> previous comment from him (saying he did not see how an architecture
>> could be
>> written before the solution specs) I inserted the term "high-level". He
>> now
>> says...
>>
>> > You mentioned "high-level" in "High-level architecture and framework".
>> > That's a step in the right direction.
>> > Personally, I would change all instances of "High-level architecture and
>> > framework" to "High-level architecture"
>>
>> Personally, I can't see that this would make any difference. I only like
>> "architecture and framework" because it kills the discussion of "Is this
>> an
>> architecture document or is it a framework document?" So I could make his
>> change
>> without feeling too depressed.
>>
>> Would this cause anyone a peptic ulcer?
>>
>> Adrian
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> i2rs mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> i2rs mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
>
>
_______________________________________________
i2rs mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs

Reply via email to