On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 11:59 AM, Hui Deng <[email protected]> wrote:
> I see that open standard is working together with open source today, just > like OPSArea presentation today. > People are seeking for the cooperation, it doesn't mean open source is > superior than open standard, or vice versa > > Nobody is saying one is better than the other. I am saying the IETF does standards. Is there a protocol you have that you want the IETF to standardize? Is there an existing protocol that needs improvement so you can accomplish your open-source project goals? Your draft needs to identify the specific work you want done in the IETF. Andy > 2016-04-06 15:52 GMT-03:00 Andy Bierman <[email protected]>: > >> Hi, >> >> I have a stronger opinion... >> IMO the IETF is not in the open-source business and has no >> official role to play in open-source. You should come to the >> IETF with very specific requests that you want addressed >> in the standards. >> >> Andy >> >> >> On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 11:21 AM, Warren Kumari <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 2:45 PM Hui Deng <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Can I treat no reply means "No", thanks a lot for chair's reply, >>>> that could save me time to work on useless preparation. >>>> >>> >>> It is currently a No. >>> >>> The current document has almost no detail. I think the right thing to do >>> is: >>> 1: flesh out the document so that there is content / protein. >>> 2: discuss it in NFVRG / SDNRG, once there is support OpsAWG might be >>> the place for a yang discussion / how this integrates with other things, >>> etc. >>> >>> W >>> >>> >>>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> >>>> DENG Hui >>>> >>>> 2016-04-05 20:18 GMT-03:00 Hui Deng <[email protected]>: >>>> >>>>> Hi Warren >>>>> >>>>> As you said, we do also contact with NFVRG and SDNRG about the draft. >>>>> The reason coming to OPSAWG is to discuss about Yang related in OPS >>>>> Area, >>>>> because there are multiple WGs related to this like (NETCONF, NETMOD), >>>>> so we approach OPSAWG for the simple way to proceed, >>>>> >>>>> thanks a lot for your consideration >>>>> Best regards, >>>>> >>>>> DENG Hui >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 2016-04-04 20:34 GMT-03:00 Warren Kumari <[email protected]>: >>>>> >>>>>> There is very little content in the draft (although it does have a >>>>>> very pretty ASCII art drawing), but I'm not sure why OpsAWG and not >>>>>> NFVRG ( >>>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/nfvrg/charter/) or SDNRG ( >>>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/sdnrg/charter/) or Netconf ( >>>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/netconf/charter/) >>>>>> >>>>>> Those groups seem much more likely... >>>>>> >>>>>> W >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 8:53 AM Hui Deng <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hello all >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We have posted a submission this morning, apologize for late >>>>>>> submission. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-deng-opsawg-nfvrg-sdnrg-openo-00.txt >>>>>>> >>>>>>> OPEN-O would intent to propose an open source project under Linux >>>>>>> foundation. It >>>>>>> includes cross domain orchestrator, SDN-O and NFV-O. SDN-O is >>>>>>> sitting on top of SDN Controller like ODL or ONOS and somewhere >>>>>>> below the SDN APP. NFVO is aligned with ETSI NFV ISG. This document >>>>>>> is seeking for the relationship between open standard IETF and open >>>>>>> source project OPEN-O. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> thanks a lot for your kind review >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> DENG Hui >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> OPSAWG mailing list >>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> OPSAWG mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg >>> >>> >> >
_______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
