I'm a bit confused on how splitting the text across 4 drafts that all
normatively reference each other will help. An implementor will still
have to read all of them to do anything and it makes it hard to keep
them consistent. If there are parts of the draft that you think don't
need to be implemented and could just be removed, well that would help
make it shorter and I'd be very happy to get recommendations and how
to make it easier for implementors by making less stuff that needed to
be implemented.
Cullen <in my individual contributor role>
On Oct 27, 2009, at 4:44 , lucy yong wrote:
Hi Cullen and Chairs,
I volunteered to review this draft in last IETF meeting and read
chapter 1~4
and some in the rest of v4.
IMHO, the draft contains too much contents and too long. It would be
nice if
it can be split into two or three drafts. One is about overlay
framework and
another is Overlay protocol.
Two major protocols for overlay management and data storage are
specified in
current draft, which can be specified in two drafts as well.
There are other protocols that apply to overlay network. If we
complete the
framework draft, all protocol drafts can be developed in parallel.
Having
such BIG and HEAVY draft is hard to get consensuses and make any
change in
later.
Regards,
Lucy
-----邮件原件-----
发件人: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] 代表
Cullen
Jennings
发送时间: 2009年10月24日 2:39
收件人: P2PSIP WG
主题: [P2PSIP] New version of draft-ietf-p2psip-base
We just submitted a new version of the base draft at
http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-p2psip-base-05.txt
(there is a new version of the sip-usage as well).
The major changes are mostly a very long and excruciating editorial
pass to try and improve the grammar.
At this point, I don't know of any significant issues that need to be
resolved. I think the draft is ready for WGLC.
I'm sure that during WGLC some major issues will come up, some
important decisions will be made about what needs to be mandatory and
such, and we will find several small inconsistencies and typos in the
draft as well as things that need a clearer explanation. This will
take some time and I expect multiple more revisions for this draft
before it is published, however, I do think this is the right time to
start WGLC. Lets get the issues on the table and then we can start
resolving them.
Thanks,
Cullen <in my individual contributor role>
_______________________________________________
P2PSIP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip
_______________________________________________
P2PSIP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip
