On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 12:26:35PM -0400, Jeffrey Haas wrote: > Jürgen, > > On Fri, May 06, 2016 at 09:34:45AM +0200, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > > I have a hard time with this document. Section 3 is labelled > > requirements but it actually details solution and I disagree with a > > significant number of the solution elements. > > If you were to restrict your comments to the requirements labeled variously: > Ephemeral-REQ-XX > PubSub-REQ-X > > do you consider the items sufficiently well described to be a requirements > document?
Mostly: - I do not understand what Ephemeral-REQ-05 is trying to say. - I disagree with Ephemeral-REQ-06 and section 3.4.1 all sounds like solution attempts (to which I do not agree). - I disagree with Ephemeral-REQ-07 and all of section 3.5 and subsections; this is not a requirement but an attempt to describe a solution. - I disagree with Ephemeral-REQ-08 and all of section 3.5 and subsections; this is not a requirement but an attempt to describe a solution. - Has Ephemeral-REQ-09 (the first one) not been stated elsewhere already? - Ephemeral-REQ-xx with xx >= 09 and xx <= 13 seem repetitions from requirements already stated elsewhere? - I did not understand section 3.7.3 and I am unsure what Ephemeral-REQ-13 or more specifically whether it is different from what is already stated in the requirements. I have trouble parsing some of the sentences, e.g. [...] I2RS notes multiple operations in one or more messages handling can handle errors within the set of operations in many ways. - I do not understand PubSub-REQ-1; what is the difference between synchronous and asynchronous push? - I may disagree with PubSub-REQ-2 but then I do not know what 'real time for notifications' means. - I may disagree with PubSub-REQ-3. - I do not understand what PubSub-REQ-4 means; what is a 'critical node event'? How do I decide this requirement has been met? - PubSub-REQ-5 seems to mix up different issues. I do not know what a hierarchy of filters of XPATHs is. - PubSub-REQ-6 is likely underspecified. Overall, I do not understand why we need these additional requirements given that we have draft-ietf-i2rs-pub-sub-requirements-08.txt. > As Sue mentioned, we can migrate solution-space discussion wholly into the > strawman document. In general, it would help me if you make an effort to reduce the number of documents and if you make an effort to avoid document overlaps. Sometimes less is more. /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103 <http://www.jacobs-university.de/> _______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
