Hi, Revision 2 of the PS, Use cases and requirements I-D has been posted. Please see: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-paws-problem-stmt-usecases-rqmts-02.txt
This version only includes changes requested by the co-chair in his email of January 12 http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/paws/current/msg00516.html Specifically: " 2. requirements. In the last f2f we agreed to modify requirement D.1 to include the suggestions from slide 7-10 ofhttp://www.ietf.org/proceedings/82/slides/paws-2.pdf and merge with D.6 and D.9 slides 7&8 of http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/82/slides/paws-1.pdf also contain suggestions on how to revise this requirement. Agreed to revise requirement D.2 as suggested in slide 11 of http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/82/slides/paws-2.pdfand slide 9 of http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/82/slides/paws-1.pdf We seem to have agreed with the reformulation suggested to D.3 in slide 12 ofhttp://www.ietf.org/proceedings/82/slides/paws-2.pdf, but we did not agree on the format the location would be represented in. The data format part is still open, but as this piece does not really belong to requirements but rather the data model spec, we are not in a hurry to decide it. Delete d.4 D.5: augment with lower/upper frequencies and time of availability, as suggested on slide 10 ofhttp://www.ietf.org/proceedings/82/slides/paws-1.pdf D.6: change power to eirp, as suggested in slide 13 of http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/82/slides/paws-2.pdf. D.7: change to single and multiple locations. Clarify that in case of multiple locations the channel availability for each location should be sent by the db. D.8: delete " And " Operational requirements: slides 22-24 of http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/82/slides/paws-2.pdf contain suggestions on rewording, I propose the editor considers them. " Regards, Scott & Raj
_______________________________________________ paws mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws
