First of all happy new year to everybody! 

The following is my WG review of draft-ietf-decade-survey-02.
 
Summary:
 
This document surveys thoroughly deployed, experimental and on-research in-network storage and cache systems/ sub-systems 
and describes their applicability for DECADE. It provides rich references for knowing what the existing systems have and 
what they lack of. Therefore the designing space of DECADE is explicated for better understanding. The draft is well written and 
conveys the group's intent well.
The authors are suggested to categorize the surveyed systems/sub-systems as user-controlled (individual) services (in scope of DECADE) 
and network-controlled (mass) services (out of scope of DECADE) to make it more focus on DECADE type services.
 
Specific comments and concerns:
1．  The organization of section 4: In this section the authors survey thoroughly deployed, experimental and on-research in-network storage 
      and cache systems/ sub-systems. However some of them are user-controlled (individual) services like section 4.1, 4.2,4.9,4.10 and 
     part of 4.12, which are in scope of DECADE; others are network controlled(mass) services where the users have no rights to operate
    the in-network storage or caches, which are out of scope of DECADE. The current organization is a little bit messy and it’s suggested 
    to separate the two parts and focus on the DECADE type services.
2．  Difference between cache and storage: In section 4, there are many places to mention in-network caches. In network-controlled 
     caches, it’s hard to introduce DECADE service because some of the operations defined in DECADE like data deletion in DECADE 
     server (if we use the current cache as the DECADE server) may raise confliction with the existing cache update mechanism 
     by Cache operators when dealing with a certain data. In section 4.14 the authors state the possible inapplicability for the cache scenarios 
     in using DECADE mechanism. But to make the draft more clear, it’s better to state explicit the scope of DECADE ahead of this section. 
    And also more discussions on whether and how much degree we need the cache system/subsystem description in this draft are needed in the group.
3.  In section 2, the No.1 effect of DECADE, to my understanding, is to improve P2P application experience in up-band constraint environment like 
    cellular mobile networks. The current draft lacks of this although this is highlighted in the PS.
4.  Data Search Capability described in section 3.3 seems irrelevant to DECADE protocols.
5.  In section 3.8 the authors propose three types of storage modes without explicit description. And the following echoes in section 4 still pose an 
     ambiguous image esp. between file and object oriented mode.
 
Nits
Section 2.2 Line2: to reducing->to reduce


Best regards,

Yunfei
 
 




zhangyunfei
2010-12-27



发件人： Woundy, Richard
发送时间： 2010-12-18 07:58:43
收件人： Rahman, Akbar
抄送： decade@ietf.org
主题： Re: [decade] Reviews of the Decade Survey draft

Thanks, Akbar.
 
Survey draft reviewers, please use draft-ietf-decade-survey-02 as the basis of your review.
 
-- Rich
 
From: Rahman, Akbar [mailto:Akbar.Rahman@InterDigital.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2010 4:42 PM
To: Woundy, Richard
Cc: decade@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [decade] Reviews of the Decade Survey draft
 
Hi Rich,
 
 
We did a small update to our  DECADE Survey draft to capture the following main points:
 
   1) Re-ordered "Informative References" to match order that they
   appear in the text.  Also changed the DECADE Problem Statement and
   Requirements references to the WG documents (from the original
   individual author documents).
 
   2) Updated text of NDN section (sec 4.6) as per off line comments
   received from Lucy Yong.
 
   3) Added a new section on NetInf section (sec 4.7) as per off line
   comments received from Borje Ohlman.
 
 
So, we would appreciate it if three volunteer reviewers take a look at the Rev. 02 version of our Survey draft:
 
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-decade-survey-02.txt
 
 
 
Sincerely,
 
Akbar
 
 
From: decade-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:decade-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Woundy, Richard
Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2010 3:14 PM
To: 'decade@ietf.org'
Subject: [decade] Reviews of the Decade Survey draft
 
Folks,
 
We would like to prepare the survey draft, draft-ietf-decade-survey-01, for working group last call in January.
 
The chairs are looking for document reviews to be sent to the mailing list by Wednesday December 29. We already have three volunteers from our session in Beijing. Additional draft reviews by the deadline would be timely and greatly appreciated.
 
After the authors incorporate the feedback from the reviews in a new draft iteration, the chairs expect to take the draft to WGLC.
 
-- Rich