Juergen:
Is your email a request for information regarding the I2RS process or a concern regarding the process? If you wished additional information about the process, as a chair - I am glad to repeat the process to make it clear. Please see the restatement of the process below. The I2RS chairs chose to provide additional input on solutions to guide NETCONF in understanding the I2RS requirements. Based on earlier feedback on too little details on our requirements, the I2RS chairs choose to provide extra details. If you are concerned about our providing extra detail, I have noted your concern. The chairs choose this direction knowing the pros/cons. We hope it will help NETCONF. If you wished to influence the I2RS requirements, you were invited to provide a proposal that would influence the I2RS WG requirements. Since you did not, you are welcome to influence the NETCONF process in providing a solution. In the IETF, you have the freedom choose where you volunteer your efforts. Best wishes for a wonderful day, Sue Hares ===================================================================== Process restated: At the end of IETF 92, the NETCONF chairs agreed with the I2RS chairs on the following cycle of work to resolve the I2RS/NETCONF work on the I2RS re-use of an NETCONF protocol a) I2RS would create a set of requirements for the I2RS protocol, b) I2RS would send these requirements to the NETCONF, and within a month of sending the requirements NETCONF would provide a review of those requirements and an initial suggestion to those solutions c) After NETCONF suggests a solution, I2RS will review it to see if it accept it. There is no requirement for NETCONF solution to be selected as an I2RS protocol. There is no requirement for the NETCONF solution to be the only protocol I2RS selection to support the I2RS interface. -----Original Message----- From: Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, June 19, 2015 2:47 AM To: Susan Hares Cc: 'Jeffrey Haas'; [email protected]; 'Joel M. Halpern'; [email protected]; 'Alia Atlas' Subject: Re: [i2rs] I2RS minutes for the I2RS Interim (5/27/2015) On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 10:52:51AM -0400, Susan Hares wrote: > Juergen: > > <chair hat on> > The I2RS WG still needs a written draft proposing how this would work > to have an effective discussion. > <chair hat off> > My understanding is that I2RS formulates requirements and the solution is done in NETCONF. If this is correct, then there is in principle no point in sending solution drafts to I2RS. Yes, I understand that requirements are often written with certain solutions in mind and this is why requirement processes usually are frustrating. /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/> http://www.jacobs-university.de/>
_______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
