Jeff,
Thank you for the response. All sounds right. I have a couple of
additional points included below that I suspect we agree on.
On 7/1/2015 3:36 PM, Jeffrey Haas wrote:
...
> The best I can recommend at this time is lets make sure everyone is paying
> attention to both drafts, identifying common components and be aware that we
> may need to reconcile the models via refactoring when the time comes. Plus
> it gets more eyeballs on both models.
Agreed. Perhaps we can get a time for the authors of the I2RS and TEAS
drafts to sit together in Prague to try to work through some of the
details - or at least ensure they are on the same technical page? I
talked to Pavan and he's willing to setup this up/coordinate.
>> > I believe that the authors of the respective drafts are already are
>> > working this. (Pavan, my co-chair as well as coauthor of the TEAS yang
>> > model, can comment on this.)
> I'm going to largely say, "Don't Panic". We all want to do the right thing
> IETF-wise.
I think we should ensure that we don't produce two models for the same
thing -- this is a "motherhood" statement, so I'd be surprised if
there's any disagreement on this point.
Thanks,
Lou
> -- Jeff
_______________________________________________
i2rs mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
