Re: [I2nsf] Call for WG adoption of draft-kumar-i2nsf-client-facing-interface-req

[Rakesh Kumar]

HI Ed,

I would be happy to address your concerns and/or incorporate new ideas you may 
have into the draft as we proceed in the WG. We would definitely take 
suggestions about the content and way to express requirements.

Regards,
Rakesh

From: I2nsf  on behalf of "elopez.i...@nym.hush.com" 

Date: Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 11:41 AM
To: Linda Dunbar , "i2nsf@ietf.org" 
Subject: Re: [I2nsf] Call for WG adoption of 
draft-kumar-i2nsf-client-facing-interface-req

I am good with the framework, but I have reservations on the functional and 
operational requirements.  I'm good to adopt this as a WG document, in the 
intent that we need to focus our effort on this, but I'm not comfortable with 
the content in its current state

- Ed

On 9/21/2016 at 1:55 PM, "Linda Dunbar"  wrote:
Dear WG:

This email serves as a call for WG adoption of 
draft-kumar-i2nsf-client-facing-interface-req as a WG document. The call for 
adoption will run for 2 weeks ending Oct 5, 2016.
The requirement document is one of the key deliverables specified by the  I2NSF 
charter.

Please note that this is a call for adoption, and not a last call for content 
of the document. Adopting a WG document simply means that the WG will focus its 
efforts on that particular draft going forward, and use that document for 
resolving open issues and documenting the WG’s decisions.

Please indicate whether you support adoption for not, and if not why. Issues 
you have with the current document itself can also be raised, but they should 
be raised in the context of what should be changed in the document going 
forward, rather than a pre-condition for adoption.

Finally, now is also a good time to poll for knowledge of any IPR that applies 
to this draft, in line with the IPR disclosure obligations for WG participants 
(see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details). If you are listed as a 
document author please respond to this email (to the chairs) whether or not you 
are aware of any relevant IPR
https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-kumar-i2nsf-client-facing-interface-req-00.txt


Authors: there are some editorial changes needed to comply with the I2NSF 
terminologies that the WG has agreed, in particular:

-Abstract: needs to change the starting sentence to “This document 
provides a framework and requirement ….”

-Change all reference of “North Bound Interface” to “Client/consumer 
facing interface”.

Thank you,

Linda & Adrian

___
I2nsf mailing list
I2nsf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf

Re: [I2nsf] Call for WG adoption of draft-kumar-i2nsf-client-facing-interface-req

[elopez . ietf]

I am good with the framework, but I have reservations on the
functional and operational requirements.  I'm good to adopt this as a
WG document, in the intent that we need to focus our effort on this,
but I'm not comfortable with the content in its current state
- Ed

On 9/21/2016 at 1:55 PM, "Linda Dunbar"  wrote:  

Dear WG: 
This email serves as a call for WG adoption of
draft-kumar-i2nsf-client-facing-interface-req as a WG document. The
call for adoption will run for 2 weeks ending Oct 5, 2016.  

The requirement document is one of the key deliverables specified by
the  I2NSF charter.  
Please note that this is a call for adoption, and not a last call for
content of the document. Adopting a WG document simply means that the
WG will focus its efforts on that particular draft going forward, and
use that document for resolving  open issues and documenting the
WG’s decisions. 
Please indicate whether you support adoption for not, and if not why.
Issues you have with the current document itself can also be raised,
but they should be raised in the context of what should be changed in
the document going forward,  rather than a pre-condition for adoption.
 
Finally, now is also a good time to poll for knowledge of any IPR
that applies to this draft, in line with the IPR disclosure
obligations for WG participants (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378
for more details). If you are listed as a  document author please
respond to this email (to the chairs) whether or not you are aware of
any relevant IPR 


https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-kumar-i2nsf-client-facing-interface-req-00.txt

Authors: there are some editorial changes needed to comply with the
I2NSF terminologies that the WG has agreed, in particular: 

-Abstract: needs to change the starting sentence to “This
document provides a framework and requirement ….” 

-Change all reference of “North Bound Interface” to
“Client/consumer facing interface”.  
Thank you,  
Linda & Adrian 

___
I2nsf mailing list
I2nsf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf

Re: [I2nsf] Call for WG adoption of draft-kumar-i2nsf-client-facing-interface-req

[Diego R. Lopez]

Hi,

Im my view, the -00 version is not mature enough to be adopted. Adopting a -00 
is rather unusual for good reasons: before WG adoption drafts usually need to 
gather comments and increase the consensus they can reach within the community.

In particular, I would have liked to see a -01 version addressing the comments 
I originally shared on the list at the beginning of August.

Be goode,


On 21 Sep 2016, at 19:54 , Linda Dunbar 
> wrote:

Dear WG:

This email serves as a call for WG adoption of 
draft-kumar-i2nsf-client-facing-interface-req as a WG document. The call for 
adoption will run for 2 weeks ending Oct 5, 2016.
The requirement document is one of the key deliverables specified by the  I2NSF 
charter.

Please note that this is a call for adoption, and not a last call for content 
of the document. Adopting a WG document simply means that the WG will focus its 
efforts on that particular draft going forward, and use that document for 
resolving open issues and documenting the WG’s decisions.

Please indicate whether you support adoption for not, and if not why. Issues 
you have with the current document itself can also be raised, but they should 
be raised in the context of what should be changed in the document going 
forward, rather than a pre-condition for adoption.

Finally, now is also a good time to poll for knowledge of any IPR that applies 
to this draft, in line with the IPR disclosure obligations for WG participants 
(see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details). If you are listed as a 
document author please respond to this email (to the chairs) whether or not you 
are aware of any relevant IPR
https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-kumar-i2nsf-client-facing-interface-req-00.txt


Authors: there are some editorial changes needed to comply with the I2NSF 
terminologies that the WG has agreed, in particular:
-Abstract: needs to change the starting sentence to “This document 
provides a framework and requirement ….”
-Change all reference of “North Bound Interface” to “Client/consumer 
facing interface”.

Thank you,

Linda & Adrian

___
I2nsf mailing list
I2nsf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf

--
"Esta vez no fallaremos, Doctor Infierno"

Dr Diego R. Lopez
Telefonica I+D
http://people.tid.es/diego.lopez/

e-mail: diego.r.lo...@telefonica.com
Tel:+34 913 129 041
Mobile: +34 682 051 091
--

___
I2nsf mailing list
I2nsf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf