Support for WG adoption. I concur with Linda's and Adrian's comments in terms of editorial changes specific to the terminology used in the document. Since the intent of the document is to address "client facing interface requirements", and irrespective of the versioning, required changes based on community comments will be made going forward anyways, I am fully in support for the adoption of this draft in its current state.
Cheers, Senad On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 2:12 PM, Anil Lohiya <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Support as a co-author. > > > > -Anil > > > > *From: *I2nsf <[email protected]> on behalf of Linda Dunbar < > [email protected]> > *Date: *Wednesday, September 21, 2016 at 10:54 AM > *To: *"[email protected]" <[email protected]> > *Subject: *[I2nsf] Call for WG adoption of draft-kumar-i2nsf-client- > facing-interface-req > > > > Dear WG: > > > > This email serves as a call for WG adoption of > draft-kumar-i2nsf-client-facing-interface-req > as a WG document. The call for adoption will run for 2 weeks ending Oct 5, > 2016. > > The requirement document is one of the key deliverables specified by the > I2NSF charter. > > > > Please note that this is a call for adoption, and not a last call for > content of the document. Adopting a WG document simply means that the WG > will focus its efforts on that particular draft going forward, and use that > document for resolving open issues and documenting the WG’s decisions. > > > > Please indicate whether you support adoption for not, and if not why. > Issues you have with the current document itself can also be raised, but > they should be raised in the context of what should be changed in the > document going forward, rather than a pre-condition for adoption. > > > > Finally, now is also a good time to poll for knowledge of any IPR that > applies to this draft, in line with the IPR disclosure obligations for WG > participants (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details). If you > are listed as a document author please respond to this email (to the > chairs) whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR > > https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-kumar-i2nsf-client- > facing-interface-req-00.txt > > > > > > Authors: there are some editorial changes needed to comply with the I2NSF > terminologies that the WG has agreed, in particular: > > - Abstract: needs to change the starting sentence to “This > document provides a framework and requirement ….” > > - Change all reference of “North Bound Interface” to > “Client/consumer facing interface”. > > > > Thank you, > > > > Linda & Adrian > > > > _______________________________________________ > I2nsf mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf > >
_______________________________________________ I2nsf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf
