Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email protected]> writes:

> Lada,
>
> there won't be any decision as long as there is not a concrete
> actionable proposal to be discussed. Such a proposal does not have to
> be 'complete rewrite' but it needs to be a detailed list of what would
> have to change so that it is possible to assess such a proposal.

This is still quite some work, so I'd first like to see an elementary
consensus that it is a good thing to do now.

Clearly it would mean further delay for 6020bis and all other documents
that depend on it. And frankly - I need to show my employer that at
least some of my IETF work ever gets finished.

Lada

>
> /js
>
> On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 01:06:54PM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>> 
>> > On 26 Jul 2015, at 12:55, Juergen Schoenwaelder 
>> > <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > 
>> > Any are concrete actionable proposals?
>> 
>> Start rewriting 6020bis, but only if we decide to go that way - it is a 
>> difficult decision. I will be slightly in favor of doing so.
>> 
>> Lada
>> 
>> > 
>> > /js
>> > 
>> > On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 12:46:22PM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>> >> 
>> >>> On 26 Jul 2015, at 02:26, Andy Bierman <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>> 
>> >>> Hi,
>> >>> 
>> >>> The WG should decide what it means for YANG to not
>> >>> be NETCONF-specific.  Why does YANG define extensions
>> >>> to NETCONF operations (like insert)? IMO the normative text
>> >>> about NETCONF should not be in the YANG RFC.
>> >>> 
>> >> 
>> >> This is essentially what I proposed in Berlin (IETF 87):
>> >> 
>> >> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/87/minutes/minutes-87-netmod
>> >> 
>> >> (first item in Open mike section).
>> >> 
>> >> Another thing that I realized only recently is that some properties that 
>> >> are inherent to the conceptual data tree are defined in “XML Mapping” 
>> >> sections.
>> >> 
>> >> I think most YANG concepts and statements can be defined in terms of data 
>> >> tree properties. Separate documents would then define different 
>> >> encodings, and “profiles” for management protocols.
>> >> 
>> >> It would need massive changes in 6020bis text though.
>> >> 
>> >> Lada
>> >> 
>> >>> 
>> >>> Andy
>> >>> 
>> >>> 
>> >>> 
>> >>> 
>> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>> netmod mailing list
>> >>> [email protected]
>> >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>> >> 
>> >> --
>> >> Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
>> >> PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C
>> >> 
>> >> 
>> >> 
>> >> 
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> netmod mailing list
>> >> [email protected]
>> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>> > 
>> > -- 
>> > 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/>
>> 
>> --
>> Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
>> PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>
> -- 
> 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/>

-- 
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C

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

Reply via email to