+1 Dean. I’m having this discussion on daily bases... I do care about sustainability and long term growth though
Regards, Jeff > On Jan 26, 2018, at 07:30, Dean Bogdanovic <[email protected]> wrote: > > I will ask a different question > > How many people have implemented the draft? And are they talking from > experience implementing the model? I have implemented LNE and NI and to be > honest, when customers ask about IETF compatibility, i reference a draft and > tell them it will take long time until IETF finalizes the RFC. When it does, > we will update the implementation if needed. Within WG are hearing very > little about implementation and operational experience and feedback during > the process. > If any company had to wait two or more years to release software, they would > find themselves out of customers. > > Dean > >> On Jan 26, 2018, at 10:22 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> OK, I accept that you do not care. Please also accept that others do >> care. And these people believe YANG library bis is needed. >> >> Since you do not want to read emails and involve yourself in >> discussions of technical details, I assume this is where our >> conversation stops. >> >> I tought you wanted to start a constructive conversation towards a >> resolution of the problem but it seems I misunderstood. >> >> /js >> >>> On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 10:06:06AM -0500, Christian Hopps wrote: >>> >>> In the context of holding up this work, I don't care one iota about YANG >>> library bis, and it works just fine with NMDA AFAICT. >>> >>> We need models to get work done. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Chris. >>> >>> Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email protected]> writes: >>> >>>>> On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 09:18:55AM -0500, Christian Hopps wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Now it seems we are supposed to wait a bunch longer on yet other works >>>>> in progress for as near as I can tell (could be wrong here as I just >>>>> don't have time to read the very long email threads that netmod >>>>> generates) capturing meta-data in a cleaner way than another. This does >>>>> *not* seem like a reason to stall this work any further. >>>>> >>>> >>>> What is your interpretation of 'a bunch longer'? Or said differently, >>>> how much time do you think it will take to get the current schema >>>> mount approved (which has pending WG last call issues) and how much >>>> time would you find acceptable for a solution that also complies with >>>> NMDA and YANG library bis? I believe people are willing to give the >>>> later high priority. >>>> >>>> /js >> >> -- >> Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH >> Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany >> Fax: +49 421 200 3103 <https://www.jacobs-university.de/> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> netmod mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod > > _______________________________________________ > netmod mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
