Hi Tom, If you have specific comments on draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model this week, I will address yours next week.
Thanks for your sincere help for our WG drafts. Best Regards, Paul On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 12:44 AM tom petch <[email protected]> wrote: > From: I2nsf <[email protected]> on behalf of Linda Dunbar < > [email protected]> > Sent: 27 April 2021 16:06 > > I2NSF WG, > > As expected, there is no issue with the second time WGLC for > draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model. > > <tp> > Sigh, I did not know there was a Last Call in progress, I did not see that > on the datatracker:-( I spent last week going round in circles trying to > dovetail the five I2NSF YANG modules and this morning finally decided that > it could not be done. > > The general concern I have is that there are a number of YANG modules that > are doing the same thing in different ways, with different terminology, > different technology, which is going to give the user heartache IMHO > > Today I read RFC8329 hoping that it would give one clear set of right > terminology but it does not help much; thus s.9.2 therein is rather vague > with question marks in places. The various YANG modules are clearly in the > same ballpark as the RFC but perhaps not on the same base e.g. the RFC has > pass, deny, mirror while this I-D has pass, drop, alert, mirror and > differences like that are repeated many times. In places, that may be by > design but in others I believe that it is not I will post some more > concrete examples on Wednesday. I will seek to use 'capability' as the > base, the refer4ence, and point out where the other four diverge > > I would say that sdn-ipsec gets it right but I also note that the IESG > made in excess of 150 changes to the I-D before approving it which I think > on the one hand was necessary but on the other hand seems a profligate use > of AD time. More could have been done beforehand IMHO. > > Tom Petch > > This email is to confirm that the WGLC for the > draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model-16 is completed. We will move this > draft to IESG. > > Thank you very much for the work. > > Best Regards, > Linda Dunbar > > From: Linda Dunbar > Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2021 4:37 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: WGLC for draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model-16 > > Hello Working Group, > > When I2NSF WG closed the WGLC for draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model > in Dec 2019 ( > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/i2nsf/?q=draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model&f_from=Linda%20Dunbar > ), there was a formative reference to draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-05 which > was stale. > > After the review, IESG decided to throw the draft back to I2NSF WG and > requested the WG to reach the consensus to sunset the > draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-05. The WG finally reached the consensus in > Oct 2020 ( > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/i2nsf/?q=draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model&f_from=Linda%20Dunbar > ) > > > Many thanks to the authors to merge all the relevant content from > draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-05 and addressed all the comments from YANG > Doctor review and > > This email starts a two-weeks Working Group Last Call on > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model/ > > This poll runs until April 13, 2021. > > We are also polling for knowledge of any undisclosed IPR that applies to > this Document, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in compliance with > IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details). > If you are listed as an Author or a Contributor of this Document, please > respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any > relevant undisclosed IPR. The Document won't progress without answers from > all the Authors and Contributors. > > If you are not listed as an Author or a Contributor, then please > explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet been > disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. > > Thank you. > > Linda & Yoav > > > _______________________________________________ > I2nsf mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf >
_______________________________________________ I2nsf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf
