Aleksandr, RNS is not a requirement. It shows up in my "GES Realization via Existing Specifications" as a means to meet the requirements. I personally think it is a good idea and allows us to work with an existing code base and access layer. Listing a directory of things is pretty common. A
-----Original Message----- From: pgi-wg-bounces@ogf.org [mailto:pgi-wg-bounces@ogf.org] On Behalf Of Aleksandr Konstantinov Sent: Friday, May 15, 2009 9:32 AM To: pgi-wg@ogf.org Subject: Re: [Pgi-wg] Promised document
On Friday 15 May 2009 13:10, David Wallom wrote:
Hi All,
Can we first agree (on the list, possibly with a doodle vote) that the requirements described in Andrews document were accurate. At this first stage please ignore the implementation, just are the requirements correct and if not what changes are required.
Is RNS requirement or implementation?
A.K.
David
On 15/05/2009 09:19, "Moreno Marzolla" <moreno.marzolla@pd.infn.it>
wrote:
David Wallom wrote:
Hi Moreno,
I would consider that this is becoming a fundamental problem within
group. When it was setup it was certainly the impression of those
the that
started off the discussions etc that it would be a profiling and current standards extension effort rather than all new standards...
As far as I'm concerned, I have always been very careful to talk about "profiling and/or writing something new", as it was never said nor suggested that profiling was absolutely the way to go. I agree that this is a fundamental issue, and I'm concerned about any real possibility to reach an agreement.
Moreno.
_______________________________________________ Pgi-wg mailing list Pgi-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/pgi-wg
_______________________________________________ Pgi-wg mailing list Pgi-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/pgi-wg