On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 5:06 AM, Nadeau Thomas <[email protected]> wrote:
> > [moving the thread to its own discussion.] > > > This is a blocking factor that people are not considering: The RFC > process the > > IETF has in place is not suitable for rapid/modern/canonical model > development. It will > > be difficult for the IESG review process to scale to even a couple > models during any given > > telechat period given the state of the document review/approval process. > How do we > > envision the IESG reviewing 250+ models (and growing)? Besides the > initial RFC version, > > rapid refresh/update of models has the same issues. > > I don't disagree, but I propose that we stick to the oper state discussion > in this email thread. > > Since this is a new thread, I am confused by the topic. This suggests that the IESG final review of drafts is the bottleneck for YANG. I see no evidence of that. The "RFC process" is a consensus and review based process. The way to circumvent that consensus-based process is to publish AD-sponsored Informational RFCs. Getting people to agree on the details has always been the hard part of standards development. YANG modules are no different from any other standard in this respect. > Regards, Benoit > Andy > > > _______________________________________________ > netmod mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod >
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
