> On May 15, 2020, at 11:08, Rob Wilton (rwilton) <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> [With AD hat on]
>
> Hi,
>
> I was really hoping that there would be more support for adopting this work
> in OPSAWG, given it covers both YANG and IPFIX it does seem like the correct
> home for it.
>
> In general, I am keen that IETF continues to flesh out and improve YANG
> models for the protocols standardized in IETF.
>
> I'm also not sure whether I would realistically be able to AD sponsor this
> document, given that I am new in the AD role, and this is currently a long
> document. The document and YANG model both look like they are in reasonable
> shape, but probably could do with some more reviews.
>
> I have a question for the authors:
>
> Would it be feasible to split this work up into smaller chunks that would
> make it easier to review. E.g. to put the packet-sampling and
> bulk-data-export into separate drafts? Perhaps pare back some optional
> functionality.
>
>
> And a question for the WG:
>
> 2) If this work was split up, and if I ask very nicely ;-), then is it
> possible that a few more people would be willing to help review a smaller
> shorter version of this document?
I will say (as a contributor) I would find it more manageable.
Joe
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
