Hi Alia,

On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Alia Atlas <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Jamal,

>
> [Alia]  If your arguments hadn't been being listened to and
> considered, the decision would have happened many months ago.

Sorry, I dont mean to be ungrateful  but I was referring to the last 2 months
or so process where i thought the real discussion was happening. Yes, you could
have dismissed ForCES right off the bat - and we have come a long way; thanks
for at least providing that opportunity.

> At the end of the day, despite a year of
> discussion and suggestion for ForCES, others who are planning on implementing
> were not persuaded nor was there a technical reason that precluded a
> different choice.
>

Persuading people already vested in netconf/restconf/yang could only happen
if the starting point was requirements from which the proposed solutions are
cross-checked.
Note: I recall the first time i brought it up, both yourself and Ed
made it clear
you were in favor of netconf/yang. I think i would have had a better chance
convincing people otherwise against a requirements list.

> [Alia] Given that either technology is possible, #b is a good to have
> that will simplify
> learning, implementation, work to be done on many models, and probably
> operations.
>

Ok.

>> On #d:
>> My challenge is accepting something without seeing a gap analysis first.
>> To me this overrides the economics of #c.
>> So i am going to wait to see how the selections actually meet
>> the requirements and how much refactoring is going to be needed for the
>> protocols before i am convinced.
>
> [Alia] There was some discussion of gap analysis earlier to give
> concepts to the WG.
> I would like to see it written down cleanly with reasons in either the
> wiki or a draft.
> I don't think that waiting for completion on each step before any
> progress is made on
> the others is a good idea.  It is clear from the list discussion that
> there are many
> interested people waiting for the WG to get on to the solutions step.
>

Then lets please move on. Like i said i will be curiously observing.

cheers,
jamal

_______________________________________________
i2rs mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs

Reply via email to