Andy:
The NETCONF chairs promised an initial response within a month. I hope NETCONF can at least provide a scope during that time period. Sue From: Andy Bierman [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, June 19, 2015 12:27 PM To: Joel M. Halpern Cc: Susan Hares; Jeffrey Haas; [email protected]; [email protected]; Alia Atlas Subject: Re: [i2rs] I2RS minutes for the I2RS Interim (5/27/2015) Hi, It is all too easy for IETF work to fall apart because of charter overlap. It's way too easy to confuse process with progress. Since the IETF is comprised of volunteers, it usually takes the involvement of stake-holders all the way through to RFC publication to get work done. My guess that unless I2RS people are involved and doing most of the work, the NETCONF WG is not likely to make much progress or even get started. Andy On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 8:08 AM, Joel M. Halpern <[email protected]> wrote: While I would expect most of the detail work on a solution to be done in NetConf, it would be very unusual to treat the requirements as something thrown over the wall, with the ensuing work done only in NetConf. If NetConf wants its work to be suitable to meet the I2RS requirements, then experience with many cross-WG activities tells us the proposal will need to also be reviewed and discussed with I2RS. If NetConf wants to do what it judges is best, and merely hope that I2RS adopts it when it is done, then the NetConf WG is certainly free to do that. But the odds of meeting the requirements are low, and the odds of I2RS waiting around on the assumption that the right magic will be thrown back over the wall is also low. Yours, Joel On 6/19/15 2:46 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: 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 _______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
_______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
