Re: [CCAMP] Fw: New Version Notification for draft-vallin-ccamp-alarm-module-00.txt

["t.petch" <[e-mail]>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Martin Bjorklund" <[e-mail]>
To: <[e-mail]>
Cc: <[e-mail]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 11:18 AM

> Hi,
>
> "t.petch" <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > Martin
> >
> > When first I read this, in its netmod designation, I scribbled in
the
> > margin
> > ** immenseley complicated
>
> Can you be more specific; is this to be interpreted in the light of
> your next comment (i.e., related to the text), or are you thinking
> about the data model's structure (or something else)?
>
> > ** 20 pages of motherhood
> > :-(
> >
> > It is unlike any other YANG module I-D that I have read.  Most such
I-D
> > are woefully weak on background information, leaving the reader in
the
> > dark as to the what and why of the YANG module.
> >
> > This goes off the scale in the opposite direction (IMHO).
> >
> > If you want to write an essay on Alarms, adding to the mountains
that
> > ITU-T have already produced, not to mention some smaller items of
the
> > IETF, then that should be a separate I-D, which the YANG module I-D,
or
> > any other I-D, can reference.
> >
> > As it is, I think that those 20 pages may alienate those whom you
might
> > like to review this, since they will know it already
>
> Ok.  If the background material is not needed, we can remove it (or
> move to an Appendix or possibly another document, as you suggest).
>
> I assume you are referring to sections 3 and 4, and large parts of the
> text in section 5?  Some of the text in section 5 would still be
> needed, but it can certainly be rewritten so that it is shorter.

Yes, that is what I have in mind, but I will be interested to see what
others think; they may welcome it:-).

By complicated I mean all the different aspects of Alarms.  I tend to
see the IETF as starting simple and adding complications as and when
they are needed e.g. with Netconf or YANG.  ITU-T, 3GPP and such like I
tend to see as putting everything in up front, some of which may never
get used, and I see this I-D as being more in that vein i.e.
complicated, at least as a starting point..

Likewise, the IETF has a process whereby things that are not
sufficiently widely implemented get excised from a Full Standard, a
philosophy I like, but tend not to see in other SDO.

Tom Petch

> /martin
>
> > , perhaps better
> > than the authors of this I-D.
>
>
> >
> > Tom Petch
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Martin Bjorklund" <[e-mail]>
> > To: <[e-mail]>
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 8:13 AM
> > Subject: [CCAMP] Fw: New Version Notification for
> > draft-vallin-ccamp-alarm-module-00.txt
> >
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > We have submitted draft-vallin-ccamp-alarm-module-00.  The
technical
> > > content is the same as in draft-vallin-netmod-alarm-module-02,
which
> > > we posted to the CCAMP mailing list some time ago for feedback.
> > >
> > > This draft is about generic alarm management.  We kindly ask the
CCAMP
> > > WG to review this document and provide feedback.  We especially
> > > welcome feedback from people who are also involved in similar work
in
> > > the ITU.
> > >
> > >
> > > /martin & stefan
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> > --------
> >
> >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > CCAMP mailing list
> > > [e-mail]
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp
> > >
> >