Re: [eman] Brian Haberman's Discuss on draft-ietf-eman-applicability-statement-10: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

[joel jaeggli <[e-mail]>]

On 4/26/15 8:01 PM, Brad Schoening wrote:
> Mouli,
> 
> Your comments address the intent for adding these use cases, but they
> don't respond to the critique of them, and therefore don't justify
> them.  Can you please respond to Pete & Alissa's questions.  Otherwise,
> let's delete them as Bruce & I have suggested.

yeah I'm ok with that.

We will find I suspect in the future that the reporting wiill be used
across many of the applications it's not specifically tailored to
because it's sufficient for the expression to end users and other
management systems.

thanks for working on this final change.

joel

> 
> Regards,
> 
> Brad
> 
> On 4/23/2015 9:45 PM, Mouli Chandramouli (moulchan) wrote:
>> Hi  Brian,
>>
>> Some of the specific use cases, you are referring had been provided as
>> feedback to WG (email or meetings)  when the draft was draft was
>> presented. 
>> It was felt that it would be useful  "unique, non-overlapping" set of
>> use cases (scenarios) of interest to energy management. 
>> It may be that after the other MIB drafts have evolved over the years,
>> it may be that we solve only a subset of use cases. 
>>
>> Thanks
>> Mouli
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Brian Haberman <[e-mail]
>> <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>> Date: Thursday, 23 April 2015 4:35 AM
>> To: The IESG <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>> Cc: "[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>"
>> <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, "[e-mail]
>> <mailto:[e-mail]>" <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>> Subject: [eman] Brian Haberman's Discuss on
>> draft-ietf-eman-applicability-statement-10: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
>>
>>     Brian Haberman has entered the following ballot position for
>>     draft-ietf-eman-applicability-statement-10: Discuss
>>
>>     When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
>>     email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut
>>     this
>>     introductory paragraph, however.)
>>
>>
>>     Please refer to
>>     http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
>>     for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
>>
>>
>>     The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
>>     http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-eman-applicability-statement/
>>
>>
>>
>>     ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>     DISCUSS:
>>     ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>     The draft still calls out some use cases that appear out of scope,
>>     especially after the discussion around the EMAN MIB document. This
>>     DISCUSS is a placeholder to address one of the author's suggestion to
>>     delete: 1) the use cases in section 2.7 last paragraph (net-zero
>>     building), 2) 2.12 (off-grid devices), and 3) 2.14 (power capping).
>>
>>
>>     ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>     COMMENT:
>>     ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>     Thank you for addressing the issue of the document's status.
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     eman mailing list
>>     [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/eman
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> eman mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/eman
> 
> 
> -- 
> *Brad Schoening*
> Email:
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> eman mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/eman
>