Re: [core] Should we bury draft-ietf-core-interfaces?

[Christian Amsüss <[e-mail]>]

Hello Carsten, hello CoRE,

On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 09:52:18PM +0100, Carsten Bormann wrote:
> At the interim call today we discussed whether core-interfaces, after already having split out all its salient parts into different documents, can now be buried.
> 
> If you agree, please say so in a reply; speak up particularly if you don’t agree.
> We probably will make a decision in the Friday IETF104 CoRE meeting, so please reply till 2019-03-28.

I see some use of core-interface terminology in senml-etch. It isn't
made explicit, but the use case description talks of batches of sensor
data, and updates several resources at once. Without the background of
core-interface batches, I think it's not immediately obvious how such a
PATCH is used, and in particular at which resource it is targeted.
(That can be addressed in senml-etch though, and doesn't need to keep
core-interfaces around).

On the procedural side, core-interfaces is part of the WG charter, so
abandoning this draft may need more than just WG consensus.

(Personally, I'll miss core-interfaces, as it shaped my introduction to
CoAP, but let that be motivation to have a good t2trg-rest-iot
document.)

Best regards
Christian

-- 
The tortoise lays on its back, its belly baking in the hot sun, beating
its legs trying to turn itself over, but it can’t, not without your
help. But you’re not helping. Why is that?
  -- Holden, Blade Runner