> I think what I am saying is that (a) there is work going on outside of I2RS and > we better avoid overlapping activities and (b) I like to remind you that work > can be split and it is not necessary that I2RS creates all data models on its > own.
Of course! The first point seems to be to decide what models are needed, the second to decide where that work should be done, or if there is work that already fits what needs to be done. I'm more concerned about where and how these models are useful for the moment, not from the perspective of how they can be used, but rather from how the impact the models needed to "make I2RS go." IE, what do these models tell us about protocol and device model requirements? :-) Russ _______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
