[Casm] Possible charter goals and milestones

Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com> Tue, 14 February 2017 17:37 UTC

Return-Path: <bclaise@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: casm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: casm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF8821296D2 for <casm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 09:37:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.522
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.522 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1O-GAft1HOaR for <casm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 09:37:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from aer-iport-4.cisco.com (aer-iport-4.cisco.com [173.38.203.54]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 840F61296CB for <CASM@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 09:37:19 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2455; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1487093839; x=1488303439; h=to:from:subject:message-id:date:mime-version; bh=cZVsxlrP5m/kAR44f2djaVTpExAwcsGW/yDZJfijWiw=; b=BH6M/vXYDVlae1GBjYyLVIkPWYFbSse1wfS4GjY5iKRrzTgtmakLrPrf q+9rqCdytXN6j5zDL3HlqWuvCfWvTEQfXWFNw8jQdFxZu6X0n4xiT/rf3 Mrfhan6eqSvLIqwY5KkCPn7XW6Ll6a0Yfr8+q4r++0j155fYC0utMkCWv I=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0A9CQCaP6NY/xbLJq1eHAEBBAEBCgEBh?= =?us-ascii?q?DYnhDiKepB/kCmHOIhjFQECAQEBAQEBAWIdC4UTMUQBPQJfDQgBAReJUJ88kAG?= =?us-ascii?q?CJSuLNwELASWGTIIFCIo8gl8Fm3KBT5BFij+GRosQiAU1IoEAIBQIFRWHAT+KV?= =?us-ascii?q?QEBAQ?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.35,162,1484006400"; d="scan'208,217";a="652482280"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-4.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 14 Feb 2017 17:37:15 +0000
Received: from [10.60.67.87] (ams-bclaise-8916.cisco.com [10.60.67.87]) by aer-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v1EHbERF031483 for <CASM@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 17:37:15 GMT
To: "CASM@ietf.org" <CASM@ietf.org>
From: Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <e3e3a854-f452-c176-1757-f0fcb94a5b2a@cisco.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 18:37:13 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------DBD4A7D676077D4B79822ADB"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/casm/pdmjWRT5uTfPHqfd-vn4pY-yBiQ>
Subject: [Casm] Possible charter goals and milestones
X-BeenThere: casm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Centralized Address Space Management <casm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/casm>, <mailto:casm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/casm/>
List-Post: <mailto:casm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:casm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/casm>, <mailto:casm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 17:37:21 -0000

Dear all,

"Possible charter goals and milestones" is mentioned in the BoF Wiki, 
but I fail to see which deliverables you have in mind, next to the 
framework?
Is/are your deliverable(s) based on 
draft-sun-i2apm-address-pool-management-yang, so (a) YANG module(s) that 
would specify the interface and facilitate the automation?
The BoF WIKI mentions "WG forming", but without a clear view on those 
deliverables, that's difficult.

Tough question: If the solution is this YANG module, based on 
draft-sun-i2apm-address-pool-management-arch, should we jump directly to 
the solution? In other words, what is the BoF added value? Note: I 
thought that those two drafts received some (mild) support in OPSAWG 
already in IETF 94.

If one of your deliverables is about the DHCP protocol, then I hope we 
all agree that it should be done in the dhc WG.

Regards, Benoit