Hi Scott, IMHO the first 2 use cases "TVWS database discovery" and "Device registration with trusted Database" are not real use cases, but aspects of the protocol. Text says "prerequisite to other use cases".
They could move to the Problem Statement section and combine text. There is already a "5.2. Database discovery". The other section would need a "5.x Device registration with trusted Database". Teco Op 27 jan. 2012, om 00:42 heeft <[email protected]> <[email protected]> het volgende geschreven: > 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 _______________________________________________ paws mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws
