Re: [i2rs] Follow-up on draft-clarke-i2rs-traceability

I support adopting this as a WG draft.

Re the YANG module I'd probably lean towards taking it out.  It reads more like a data model than an information model to me (at least inasmuch as it defines data types etc.)  As long as the draft indicates what should be logged then it'll be straightforward to map that into Syslogs, NETCONF Notifications, or whatever, if you want to send the data over the wire.

Giles

On 23 Jul 2014, at 18:26, Joe Clarke <jclarke@cisco.com> wrote:

> At the meeting yesterday, the chairs called out a few non-chartered drafts that had progressed and should have a final decision made as to their future.  One was our draft-clarke-i2rs-traceability.
> 
> I would like to address the question the chairs raised on the draft and ask the WG if this can be adopted.  The question was, should this draft be standalone or part of the architecture doc.
> 
> This draft originally began as comments to Alia on the arch draft.  Alia suggested that a draft outlining what should be logged for purposes of traceability should be created independent of the arch.  Since then, the arch has had some traceability language added, but the details spelled out in draft-clarke-i2rs-traceability take these "breadcrumbs" and expand on them specific to what would be required for those needing to do diagnostic operations, accounting, and auditing.  On top of that, the architecture draft is very well-baked right now, and would benefit from going through on its own.
> 
> In that case, I feel that this draft-clarke-i2rs-traceability stands very much on its own and compliments the arch draft.
> 
> Some of the feedback we've had on our latest rev (-02) was regarding the YANG model we added.  The comments have been that a YANG model really isn't needed here.  In fact, some of the general parts of this might fit in the new syslog model work happening in NETMOD.  We would not be opposed to taking out this module, and retaining the English text explaining the importance of logging in I2RS as well as what should be logged.
> 
> Therefore, we (the authors) would ask the WG for two things:
> 
> 1. Closure on the YANG module question.
> 2. Adoption of draft-clarke-i2rs-traceability as a WG item
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> i2rs mailing list
> i2rs@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs