Subject: [drinks] Rough Notes and AI list from the design team call on 9/15

From: Sumanth Channabasappa <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2011 16:35:49 -0600

IETF DRINKS DESIGN TEAM CALL 
============================
9/15/2011, 10:00a-11:00a (Eastern)/8:00a-9:00a (Mountain)
 
Participants
============
- Ken Cartwright
- Manjul Maharishi
- Jeremy Barkan
- David Schwartz
- Dean Willis
- Syed Ali

- Sumanth Channabasappa 

ACTION ITEMS UPDATE
===================

+ New & Pending
[David S., 9/2]   Present a proposal to allow for extensibility in an interoperable manner                      -- no updates
[Chairs]          Finalize a response to the ITU liaison statement (https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/518/)  -- in progress, proposal sent to ADs

+ Completed
[Ken, Syed, 9/14] Present proposal to separate protocol and transport document
[Alex, 9/2]     Propose considerations around internationalization
[Chairs, 9/8]   Check with the ADs (or IESG members) to see if we will need to refine the current separation of protocol and transport documents
[Authors, 9/8]  Incorporate comments based on the discussions at the interim

AGENDA
======
1. Follow-up on AIs
2. Discuss separation of protocol and transport documents
3. Next Steps

NOTES
=====

1. Follow-up on AIs
- See update above

2. Discuss separation of protocol and transport documents
- Ken summarized the thoughts he sent via email (on 9/13) based on discussions between him and Syed. We had various discussions around the presented topics.
- Sumanth reminded that the purpose of the separation is not to build a RESTful web services approach (not in the charter), but to separate the protocol and transport such that one can specify a RESTful web services implementation.
  > Dean and Ken indicated that we may not be able to avoid going deeper into RESTful web services for we want to make sure that we can implement it that way
- Dean then presented some thoughts on transaction definitions and usage; will follow-up over email
- Dean also asked about the atomicity or not of operations
  > Syed and Sumanth clarified that, based on the discussion in Quebec, all operations are considered "atomic" (i.e., all or nothing)
- Further discussion will continue on the list

3. Next Steps
- See AIs