Hi, Tom: -----邮件原件----- 发件人: netmod [mailto:[email protected]] 代表 tom petch 发送时间: 2020年12月23日 19:14 收件人: Dhruv Dhody <[email protected]>; Lou Berger <[email protected]> 抄送: NetMod WG Chairs <[email protected]>; NETMOD Group <[email protected]> 主题: Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-wwx-netmod-event-yang-10
From: netmod <[email protected]> on behalf of Dhruv Dhody <[email protected]> Sent: 21 December 2020 17:12 Hi Lou, WG, I find the motivation in the Introduction to be focused on ECA at the network devices (with all the talk about issues with Centralized network management). I see the value of ECA on the controller as well, say a customer network controller or an orchestrator can set the ECA on a central controller (reference ACTN in TEAS WG). Perhaps you would consider adding a sentence to describe this as well. The client-server terminology in the rest of the document covers it already. And I do see value in this and support adoption. <tp> My take is that the I-D is unclear on what ECA is. [Qin]: Thanks Tom, Adrian raised the similar issue about the abstract improvement and we will address this in v-01. ECA has been worked on in at least two IETF WG AFAICT. It cropped up in I2RS but as I recall, it was along the lines of 'This is ECA' 'No It is not' 'Yes it is' which gave me the impression that ECA is not a well-defined, or well-understood, term. More recently, I2NSF have produced a YANG capability-data-model which is 55 pages of ECA. Lacking a definition in this netmod I-D, I am unclear what the relationship is between the I2NSF I-D and the netmod I-D, whether or not they are using ECA in the same sense. [Qin]: I haven't followed closely on what had been done in I2NSF. But I did talk with two of I2NSF proponents in this year. They tend to agree the model proposed in draft-wwx will serve as the basis for I2NSF security policy model or NSF facing interface DM. Unfortunately I haven't seen their update to do the alignment. I missed their I2NSF recharter discussion meeting. But I would also highly recommend they import the model in draft-wwx and reuse some of these building block. I plan to raise this issue later on. For I2RS model, it was packet forwarding policy model, which has been expired for many years. If that draft needs to be revived, I think we can follow the similar approach for I2NSF security policy model. Thanks! Dhruv On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 3:59 AM Lou Berger <[email protected]> wrote: > > This email begins a 2-week adoption poll for: > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wwx-netmod-event-yang-10 > > Please voice your support or technical objections on list before the > end of December 21, any time zone. > > Thank you! > > Netmod Chairs > > PS Note the IPR poll is running concurrently as the private response > all indicated that no IPR exists. The draft will not be formally > adopted until both the IPR and WG polls are complete. > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
