Thanks for this Med, I am fine with this inclusion. //Zahed
On Wed, Dec 13, 2023 at 10:53 AM <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Zahed, > > > That is understandable, and it this is conscious decision to not cover > > the latest and greatest then I would expect the specification describe > > that. A statement on the current scope and the potential extendibility > > to cover the new ALTO transport will help here. > > A PR to clarify that TIPS is out of scope can be seen at: > https://github.com/ietf-wg-alto/draft-ietf-alto-oam-yang/pull/102/files > > Please let the WG know if more is needed. Thank you. > > Cheers, > Med (doc Shepherd) > > > -----Message d'origine----- > > De : BOUCADAIR Mohamed INNOV/NET > > Envoyé : jeudi 26 octobre 2023 17:22 > > À : 'Zaheduzzaman Sarker' <[email protected]> > > Cc : The IESG <[email protected]>; [email protected]; > > [email protected]; [email protected] > > Objet : RE: Zaheduzzaman Sarker's Discuss on draft-ietf-alto-oam-yang- > > 15: (with DISCUSS) > > > > Re-, > > > > Please see inline. > > > > Cheers, > > Med > > > > > Zahed, > > > > > > > > > > > > It is a matter of balance between what the WG can successfully > > deliver vs. > > > exhaustiveness. Proceeding in steps (having first a base module + > > > including provision to graft extension) is pragmatic given the > > limited > > > resources of the WG. > > > > > > > That is understandable, and it this is conscious decision to not cover > > the latest and greatest then I would expect the specification describe > > that. A statement on the current scope and the potential extendibility > > to cover the new ALTO transport will help here. > > > > Med: Looks good to be me. Added an issue to record this: > > https://github.com/ietf-wg-alto/draft-ietf-alto-oam-yang/issues/101 > > > > > > I have seen other YANG documents do that when they are not covering > > for example QUIC. > > > > > > > > > > > Please note that the spec relies upon common reusable http models > > > (draft-ietf-netconf-http-client-server) which do not support http/3. > > > > > > > Noted, those are still in draft I guess and we can ask question why > > they support HTTP/3 while they are working on it. There might be valid > > reason for doing it , and important thing is to acknowledge it. > > > > Med: I would be surprised if that draft is changed to cover HTTP/3 > > given that it was there since 2019 and it would be great to finalize > > it given the set of I-Ds that depends on it: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netconf-http-client- > > server/referencedby/. > > > > > > //Zahed > > ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations > confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc > pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez > recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler > a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages > electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, > Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou > falsifie. Merci. > > This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged > information that may be protected by law; > they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. > If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and > delete this message and its attachments. > As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been > modified, changed or falsified. > Thank you. >
_______________________________________________ alto mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
