Re: [Detnet] WG adoption poll draft-geng-detnet-conf-yang

Hi Rodney,

On 9/20/2018 6:29 PM, Rodney Cummings wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> At the moment, I am "no / do not support".
>
> I am confused by what it means for the WG to adopt this draft.

Adoption of any draft basically means that the WG is formally working on 
the document/topic.  As an individual draft, the draft authors have 
control of a documents contents.  Once a draft is a WG document, control 
shifts to the WG  and the editors/authors are responsible for ensuring a 
document reflects consensus of the WG. Authors do have flexibility in 
how they do this. For example, proposing changes in on list prior to 
publication of a new version, or simply putting such changes in a new 
version for review by the WG are both common practices.

> The draft contains YANG for configuration of IEEE 802.1 features in a node (bridge, router, etc). This includes 802.1CB ("PREOF"), 802.1Qav (credit-based shaper), and so on. There are similar YANG projects in 802.1 for these features.

I would expect that there be similarities in configuring DetNet and TSN 
services, but I do agree, we (DetNet and the IETF) should not be 
defining specifics of technology standardized by other bodies as part of 
our normal business.  Now if we synchronize with that other SDO, and 
they agree that we do some complementary work, this is fine -- but I 
don't believe this is the case here.

> Therefore, does adoption of this draft mean that IETF DetNet intends to do YANG work that overlaps with 802.1 YANG work?
>
> I would hope that the answer is No.

I do think it is fair to sort out the inter-SDO related contents prior 
to adoption so that we don't send mixed signals to the IEEE or the 
market.  Can you, either on-list or off-list to authors, state 
specifically which parts of the document/tree you think should be removed?

> On a different point, I don't think that topology is part of node configuration (southbound). Topology is not flow or service related, but it is between the Network Operator (controller) and the User... northbound. If I am correct, this draft is starting with an incorrect assumption.
This sounds like a topic that could get sorted post adoption, do you agree?

Thanks,
Lou
> Rodney
>
> From: detnet<detnet-bounces@ietf.org>  On Behalf Of Janos Farkas
> Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2018 2:02 PM
> To:detnet@ietf.org
> Cc:detnet-chairs@ietf.org
> Subject: [Detnet] WG adoption poll draft-geng-detnet-conf-yang
>
> Dear all,
>
> This is start of a two week poll on making draft-geng-detnet-conf-yang-04
> a working group document. Please send email to the list indicating
> "yes/support" or "no/do not support".  If indicating no, please state
> your reservations with the document.  If yes, please also feel free to
> provide comments you'd like to see addressed once the document is a WG
> document.
>
> The poll ends Oct 3.
>
> Thanks,
> János and Lou
>
> _______________________________________________
> detnet mailing list
> detnet@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet
>