-----邮件原件-----
发件人: Joe Clarke (jclarke) [mailto:[email protected]] 
发送时间: 2019年10月31日 1:11
收件人: Tianran Zhou <[email protected]>
抄送: [email protected]; [email protected]; 
[email protected]
主题: Re: WG adoption call for draft-wu-model-driven-management-virtualization-07

> On Oct 28, 2019, at 21:43, Tianran Zhou <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Hi WG,
> 
> This email starts a 2 weeks working group adoption call for 
> draft-wu-model-driven-management-virtualization-07.
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-wu-model-driven-management-virt
> ualization/ This document provides a framework that describes and 
> discusses an architecture for service and network management automation that 
> takes advantage of YANG modeling technologies.
> 
> If you support adopting this document please say so, and please give an 
> indication of why you think it is important. Also please say if you will be 
> willing to review and help the draft.
> If you do not support adopting this document as a starting point for work on 
> this topic, please say why.
> This poll will run until Nov 11.

As an individual, I support adoption.  I had some private comments for the 
authors on the latest revision that I will share here because I think they are 
critical to the adoption call.  I realize some of these may have been corrected 
in an upcoming rev.
[Qin]: Thanks Joe, most of your comments have been addressed in v-07. Figure 1 
in section 3.1 needs to be fall back to v-06, thanks Med for good catch.
* I found some of the text meandering and confusing.  The intro, for example, 
laid out a challenge around telemetry consumption, but this doc doesn’t really 
address the scale issue.
[Qin]:Fixed.
* Section 4.2.3 also crosses from a pure model discussion to something more 
NETCONF protocol-specific in directly mentioning <operational> (and without 
reference).  I agree operational state is important, but this mention seems out 
of place.
[Qin]:Fixed in v-07.
* I’d also like to see your examples go through the entire lifecycle, or at 
least more so than they do.  For example, getting to fault diagnosis would be 
helpful since Section 4.2.4 doesn’t really give much content there.
[Qin]:Improved, thanks.
Joe

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

Reply via email to