Re: [i2rs] Suresh Krishnan's No Objection on draft-ietf-i2rs-ephemeral-state-19: (with COMMENT)

Suresh: 

The NETCONF and NETMOD groups have asked the I2RS to specify the
requirements, and not the specific solutions.    We have done
implementations based on NETCONF/RESTCONF that solve these issues, and
described the mechanisms.  However, the NETCONF and 
NETMOD groups have asked us only to provide requirements.  All the solutions
must be discussed in the NETCONF/NETMOD working groups. 

Sue 

-----Original Message-----
From: i2rs [mailto:i2rs-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Suresh Krishnan
Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2016 3:03 AM
To: The IESG
Cc: jclarke@cisco.com; draft-ietf-i2rs-ephemeral-state@ietf.org;
i2rs-chairs@ietf.org; i2rs@ietf.org
Subject: [i2rs] Suresh Krishnan's No Objection on
draft-ietf-i2rs-ephemeral-state-19: (with COMMENT)

Suresh Krishnan has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-i2rs-ephemeral-state-19: No Objection

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 https://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:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-i2rs-ephemeral-state/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I am surprised to see MUST level requirements on YANG 

"Ephemeral-REQ-06: YANG MUST have the ability to do the following:"

and further requirements on NETCONF (REQ-09) and RESTCONF (REQ-10) in this
document.

Are there associated drafts in the respective WGs to make sure these
requirements are met?

_______________________________________________
i2rs mailing list
i2rs@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs