Hi, Tom and Tianran: It looks the new proposed draft name more reflects what it is, but referencing to IETF standards process, the draft name change rule is nothing more than one mentioned by Tom. I knew in the history, there was some exception about draft name changes, e.g., change draft-fielding-http-spec-01 into draft-ietf-http-v10-spec, using "replace" button to link them together and published as RFC1945, but it is the rare thing that seldom happens. Therefore I have no strong preference on what WG draft name should be changed. Thanks!
-Qin -----邮件原件----- 发件人: tom petch [mailto:[email protected]] 发送时间: 2019年11月12日 18:02 收件人: Tianran Zhou <[email protected]>; [email protected] 抄送: [email protected]; [email protected] 主题: Re: [OPSAWG] conclusion//RE: WG adoption call for draft-wu-model-driven-management-virtualization-07 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tianran Zhou" <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2019 6:10 AM > Hi WG, > > Now we conclude the poll and adopt this document as WG draft. > We collected many interests and supports that can help the document evolution. > > Authors, > The chairs think "virtualization" in the draft name is confusing, and suggest to rename it as "model-driven-management-automation". What's your thoughts? > Please republish draft-wu-model-driven-management-virtualization-07 as draft-ietf-model-driven-management-automation-00 with only the date and file name changed. And please use "replace" in the data tracker. Tianran I think that that is a bad idea. Who cares what the draft name is? What is needed is a stable handle for it as it wends its way through the IETF after which the draft name vanishes in the dust of history. The only expected change is from draft-authername to draft-ietf at the time of adoption. Anything else just increases the workload, if only a fraction, for everyone involved. Tom Petch > Cheers, > Tianran & Joe > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: OPSAWG [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Tianran Zhou > > Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2019 9:44 AM > > To: [email protected] > > Cc: [email protected]; > > [email protected] > > Subject: [OPSAWG] WG adoption call for > > draft-wu-model-driven-management-virtualization-07 > > > > 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-virtua > > lization/ > > 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. > > > > Thanks, > > Tianran and Joe > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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
