On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 1:39 PM, Thomas Nadeau <[email protected]> wrote: > > Why is that not useful? Because I didn't say I was in favor of > forces? *)
Not at all. Your statement was more like a high five. It is ok to raise your hand at the meeting - but i was hoping the list would have more useful technical discussion. >It IS useful to say that my company's products implement Yang/Netconf and will >support RestConf, >and therefore a derivative of those technologies used for >i2rs is preferred. We have no plans to >support any of the other discussed >options in i2rs such as Forces at this time. The reasons are >simple: our >customers asked for Netconf/Yang models and as far as I can tell, have no >interest in >Forces. > So again it boils down to "bussiness" reasons - am i wrong? "we have an implementation of Yang/netconf"; "we are going to make it work for I2RS". If thats the case - then lets just end the discussion. I am hoping to get the answer to: What are the technical requirements/arguements? Why do i have to struggle so much in a technical environment like IETF for someone to come out and say what the requirements are? I can assure you that i have no religious conviction that say it has to be ForCES. Lets actually start with you showing me how netconf/yang meets the requirements. Otherwise - please stop with the high fives. > From my perspective, continuing to debate which protocol is derived > to become i2rs is a waste >of everyone's time. Whats the point to having a circus show in pretending we are trying to get any consensus? >Its clear what people want from the meeting, and if you poll interested >implementations you'll likely >get the same answer: yang/netconf/restconf. >Lets please stop delaying i2rs and get some work >done here. > When you go and ask people to raise their hands they will. You need to ask them why they are raising their hands. I am hoping this is not a staked popularity contest. cheers, jamal _______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
