Re: Blog: YANG Really Takes Off in the Industry

["Thomas D. Nadeau" <[e-mail]>]

	One of the things that came up in a number of discussions I had in Hawaii and afterwards was around the coordination and encouragement topics. A number of people commented both during these discussions (and I think someone did during one of the Netmod sessions) that the “MIB Doctor” model we are using is not going to scale out to the numbers of Yang models that are in need of advice or review, nor will be scale in terms of progressing models through the IETF’s RFC process. The fact is that we simply do not have enough Yang Doctors to cover all of the models in question, despite our best efforts.   It is for this reason that I strongly encourage other venues of review and advice such as a continued “advice” or “Yangathon” session at each IETF meeting going forward, as well as encouraging a loosening of the interim WG meeting rules to encourage more meetings, as well as perhaps less formalized ones.  I also encourage the IETF to start pairing up with other organizations such as OpenDaylight, Openstack and OP-NFV and join their Yangathons there.

	—Tom


	
> On Nov 28, 2014:8:12 AM, at 8:12 AM, Benoit Claise <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Hi Jari,
> 
> Let me open the discussion.
> What is important at this point in time is the coordination of those YANG models.
> All of them come at the same time, and this required some urgent attention.
> Focusing on the routing YANG models with "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]> <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtg-yang-coord> is a step in the right direction. Indeed the community needs to agree on how to model IGPs, BGP, the topology, etc...
> However, the coordination should also occur with the data models developed in other IETF WGs. And the IETF might need to reach out to different SDOs/consortia. 
> As the operators told me: we can't afford to develop those data models independently from each others.
> 
> Regards, Benoit
>> Thanks for writing this article, Benoit!
>> 
>> The wave of new data models is obviously interesting and exciting. But I wanted to open a discussion with you all on what we should do with regards to serving this need better. Is there something that we could do better at the IETF to be able deal with this new work?
>> 
>> Jari
>> 
>