Thanks for reminding me. We should also look at the latest Ofcom publication that has a lot of discussion on master/slave requirements
On ThuMay/24/12 Thu May 24, 4:16 AM, "Nancy Bravin" <[email protected]> wrote: >Hi Gabor, Scott, and Raj, > >Has there been a comparison with the 3rd R & O as suggested earlier that >affects the Draft and should be addressed now before >we submit and discussion there of? >I am not sure why things are so quiet, but it seems that would be a >timely thing to do now. > >Sincerely, Nancy > >On May 23, 2012, at 5:39 PM, <[email protected]> ><[email protected]> wrote: > >> Sure. Adding (or putting back) a requirement on pre-configuration >>shouldn't be a problem. We'll work out a requirement which all of us is >>going to be happy with. >> >> In the meantime, I would like to ask more people to review the draft >>and send comments to the list. As I mentioned in my previous mail, if >>you review the draft and have no comments, send a note to the list that >>the draft is good as it is, we need these notes as much as we need the >>actual comments. >> >> Thanks, Gabor >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: ext Joel M. Halpern [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2012 10:17 AM >> To: Bajko Gabor (Nokia-CIC/SiliconValley) >> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [paws] 2nd WGLC for >>draft-ietf-paws-problem-stmt-usecases-rqmts >> >> I beg to differ slightly. >> While preconfiguration is always possible, if we leave out the >>requirement to support it, then we are likely to also leave such >>configuration capabilities out of management models, etc. If it is >>"always possible" then including it in the requirements seems >>inexpensive. >> >> Yours, >> Joel >> >> On 5/17/2012 12:01 PM, [email protected] wrote: >>> O.3 The master device MUST identify a database to which it will >>> register, make channel requests, etc... The master device MAY >>> >>> select a database for service by discovery at runtime *or the master >>> device MAY select a database for service by means of a* >>> >>> *pre-programmed URI address.* >>> >>> However in the requirements it seems that the ability to support the >>> FCC model has been removed. Specifically: >>> >>> It appears that the data model requirements that supported hardcoded >>> URI addresses for WSDBs have been removed >>> >>> <GB> pre-configuration is always possible. We don't need a separate >>> requirement for it. >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> paws mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws > >_______________________________________________ >paws mailing list >[email protected] >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws _______________________________________________ paws mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws
