On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 07:09:56PM -0400, Alia Atlas wrote: > Based upon the WGLC comments, I have updated these two drafts. Because I > believe that the changes are not particularly controversial (except for the > new reference to NETCONF and RESTCONF), I've published the updated versions > so that the WG can verify the changes at the same time as my co-authors.
I suggest to take this out again: Additionally, on March 2, 2014, the IESG issued a statement about Writeable MIB Modules which is expected to limit creation of future writeable MIB modules. This is what the statement really says (despite its unfortunate title, http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/writable-mib-module.html): SNMP MIB modules creating and modifying configuration state should only be produced by working groups in cases of clear utility and consensus to use SNMP write operations for configuration, and in consultation with the OPS ADs/MIB doctors. My understanding is that configuration here is meant in the OPS sense and my understanding is that I2RS is about changing operations state as understood in the OPS community. /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103 <http://www.jacobs-university.de/> _______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
