Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-brissette-bess-evpn-yang

Thanks Patrice,
That works for me as a resolution of this point.
Adrian

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Patrice Brissette (pbrisset) [mailto:pbrisset@cisco.com]
> Sent: 25 May 2016 12:27
> To: Adrian Farrel; 'Thomas Morin'; bess@ietf.org
> Cc: draft-brissette-bess-evpn-yang@tools.ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-brissette-bess-evpn-yang
> 
> Thank Adrian for your review.
> 
> IMO, the merging of both Yang model is not longer appropriate.
> At the beginning, it wasn¹t clear how both models will coexist.
> I think both model are orthogonal and having L2VPN referring to EVPN is
> the right way.
> I will take out the comment related to ³future investigation².
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Patrice
> 
>    Patrice Brissette
> TECHNICAL LEADER.ENGINEERING
> 
> pbrisset@cisco.com
> Phone: +1 613 254 3336
> 
> Cisco Systems Canada Co. / Les Systemes Cisco Canada CIE
> Canada
> Cisco.com <http://www.cisco.com/global/CA/>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 2016-05-24, 8:56 AM, "BESS on behalf of Adrian Farrel"
> <bess-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of adrian@olddog.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> >Thomas,
> >
> >I think I also don't object to the adoption of this I-D.
> >
> >In addition to the use of the term "service model" that I raised for
> >draft-shah-bess-l2vpn-yang and that I think should lead to clarification
> >of the
> >purpose of the model described in this document, I have one question:
> >
> >The Abstract says "The merging of this model with L2 services model is for
> >future investigation" and I assume this refers to
> >draft-shah-bess-l2vpn-yang.
> >Isn't now (i.e., the moment of adoption) a good time to try to make that
> >decision so that work can progress smoothly once inside the WG?
> >
> >Cheers,
> >Adrian
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: BESS [mailto:bess-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Morin
> >> Sent: 04 May 2016 15:18
> >> To: bess@ietf.org
> >> Cc: draft-brissette-bess-evpn-yang@tools.ietf.org
> >> Subject: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-brissette-bess-evpn-yang
> >>
> >> Hello working group,
> >>
> >> This email starts a two-week poll on adopting
> >> draft-brissette-bess-evpn-yang [1] as a working group document.
> >>
> >> Please state on the list if you support adoption or not (in both cases,
> >> please also state the reasons).
> >>
> >> This poll runs until *May 25th*.
> >>
> >> This call runs in parallel with the adoption call on
> >> draft-shah-bess-l2vpn-yang hence the extended period.
> >>
> >>
> >> We are *coincidentally* also polling for knowledge of any other
> >> IPR that applies to this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed
> >> in compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669
> >> and 5378 for more details).
> >>
> >> ==> *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor please
> >> respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any
> >> relevant IPR.
> >>
> >> The draft will not be adopted until a response has been received from
> >> each author and contributor.
> >>
> >> If you are not listed as an author or contributor, then please
> >> explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet
> >> been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules.
> >>
> >> Thank you,
> >>
> >> Martin & Thomas
> >> bess chairs
> >>
> >> [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-brissette-bess-evpn-yang
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> BESS mailing list
> >> BESS@ietf.org
> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >BESS mailing list
> >BESS@ietf.org
> >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess