Forgot to change the topic. I would like to follow up and build on this - but i wanted to make sure there was some sanity first.
cheers, jamal ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Jamal Hadi Salim <[email protected]> Date: Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 6:24 AM Subject: Re: [i2rs] consensus on I2RS protocol and model To: Dean Bogdanovic <[email protected]> Cc: Andy Bierman <[email protected]>, "<[email protected]>" <[email protected]>, Martin Bjorklund <[email protected]>, "<[email protected]>" <[email protected]>, "<[email protected]>" <[email protected]> On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 4:19 PM, Dean Bogdanovic <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Apr 23, 2014, at 3:54 PM, Andy Bierman <[email protected]> wrote: > > I thought I2RS is starting out focusing on 1 client and 1 agent. Dont think so. > Network locking across devices is out of scope. > > > > I have same opinion as you on this one, just wanted to spell it out one more > time explicitly, as I heard some discussions where network locking was > coming up. > Either I am misunderstanding both of you or both of you misunderstood the requirement. The idea is to allow a single writer per object as a starting point. OTOH, if you really mean what you say then I violently disagree. cheers, jamal PS:- Changing the topic so this is not lost in the noise because i think that the many clients-single agent brings needs for other protocol requirements. _______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
