Sounds like working with the OPES group to parse out and align the protocol
definitions to
align to both group's requirements would be a plus for Webi and OPES
Michael Condry
At 11:43 PM 12/11/2001, David E. Martin wrote:
We had a good discussion at the Webi LunchBoF Tuesday. We talked about how
to get more involvement and where we should head. It was not an official
Webi meeting, but an informal chance to brainstorm. Some items from the
discussion (in random order). These were discussion topics, not decisions.
1) Ned Freed and Allison Mankin chaired the OPES BoF and promised more IAB
attention on content distribution issues. The increased focus on OPES will
probably help Webi as well. We should try and take advantage of this by
involving some of the interested parties from Webi.
2) IBM is working on documenting the invalidation protocol used in WebSphere
and is planning on releasing a draft "soon." The requirements draft has some
concepts that are pretty specific to WCIP and would benefit from more
datapoints.
3) The two activities that are identified in the charter for Webi are
invalidation and discovery. The most intellectually interesting area is
discovery, but the group chose to work on invalidation as a first priority.
There was a good bit of interest in discovery issues.
4) One of the items from the OPES BoF was the need for OPES proxy "tracing."
It is possible that a Webi discovery protocol could be used for this. Since
OPES has a ton of work to do, we may be able to get some additional Webi
participation for discovery.
5) The requirements draft has substantially all the requirements, but could
use some editing for readability and flow.
6) There was discussion about whether the W3C might be a more appropriate
place for the Webi/OPES/CDI work. The W3C has more dedicated resources than
the IETF and a somewhat more focused process. In general, the feeling is
that the W3C is more focused on schema-type issues and less on protocol
issues.
7) Although there might be advantages to re-chartering the Webi work, the
current turmoil in the content networking space means that we should be stay
with what we have. We're the only group in the space that is chartered
right now and we don't want to mess with that!
8) Almost any work in this space needs some involvement from Microsoft.
We'll try to approach them with whatever channels we have.
9) We hope that the draft from IBM, the updates to the requirements
document, and the discussion of discovery will cause some quality discussion
on the list.
10) It might be a good idea to hold a regular conference call--either
between the ADs and the chairs of OPES, Webi, and CDI or among the general
membership of the groups.
11) The OPES, Webi, and CDI groups have enough overlapping issues that it
might be good to have a coordination working group like IMPP is for the
instant messaging space.
At the lunch:
Jules Aronson, David Martin, Ian Cooper, Graham Klyne, Lee Rafalow, Stephen
McHenry, Joseph Hui.
I welcome any corrections or additions.
David E. Martin
Program Director, Internet Standards and Technology
IBM
One IBM Plaza
330 N. Wabash Ave.
Chicago, IL 60611 USA
+1 312 245-7691 (phone and fax)
martinde(_at_)us(_dot_)ibm(_dot_)com
Michael W. Condry
Director, Network Edge Technology