> From: Nadeau Thomas, February 24, 2016 9:20 AM
> 
> > On Feb 23, 2016:6:21 PM, at 6:21 PM, Eric Voit (evoit) <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Kent,
> >
> > Thanks for running the interim, I agree it was quite useful.
> >
> > One thing I wanted to pull out from the minutes was the overall definition 
> > of
> "Mount".     Right now there are 830 web pages on the OpenDaylight site which
> refer to "Mount" in terms of Peer Mount (i.e., something much like 
> draft-clemm-
> netmod-mount).
> >
> > That does not mean that the IETF need define "Mount" the same way as an
> Open Source project.  But it is possible at this stage to create both 
> terminology
> and requirements which breaks down the overall problem space.   In other
> words there is nothing stopping us from defining a set of terms and technology
> solutions which fit together in a complimentary way.  Nothing here need
> conflict.
> 
>       I agree that normalizing the terminology is probably a good thing.  What
> I would caution against is a unilateral definition here as it is likely to be 
> IETF-
> centric; its a good idea to poll the other communities that are using this
> technology.

Makes sense.   Any thoughts on who might represent the meaning of Mount from 
ODL?

Eric

>       —Tom
> 
> 
> > If there is community interest, I would be willing to pull together a 
> > strawman
> requirements/terminology draft describing the differences between mounting
> schemas on a box, mounting a remote datastore.
> >
> > Any interest?
> > Eric
> >
> >> From: netmod, February 22, 2016 3:51 PM
> >>
> >>
> >> Thank you all who joined today’s virtual interim meeting.
> >>
> >> Other than my starting the recording late and rearranging the
> >> presentation order, I thought that the meeting went really well in
> >> that there seems to be a lot of support for trying to solve this
> >> problem, and because we have a plan to try to move towards having a
> >> WG document in the BA timeframe.  The plan is for
> >> draft-bjorklund-netmod-structural-mount to be updated based on the
> meeting and for it to be discussed on list as the basis for the WG effort on 
> the
> topic.
> >>
> >> Attached are the very rough Ethernet minutes captured during the meeting.
> >> Please review carefully.  Corrections can be made on the etherpad here:
> >> http://etherpad.tools.ietf.org:9000/p/netmod-interim-20160222  (so we
> >> can track changes, the end of meeting snapshot is here:
> >> http://etherpad.tools.ietf.org:9000/p/netmod-interim-
> >> 20160222/timeslider#3933)
> >>
> >> To listen to the recording, please follow one of these two links:
> >>
> >>  Streaming recording link:
> >>
> >> https://ietf.webex.com/ietf/ldr.php?RCID=4dc88386f13a49fa8f2c934db953
> >> f4a2
> >>
> >>  Download recording link:
> >>
> >> https://ietf.webex.com/ietf/lsr.php?RCID=1b6490fe5cc6fc95d4e3c9b913df
> >> dc1f
> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks again,
> >>
> >> Kent and Lou
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > netmod mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

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

Reply via email to