IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Netconf] is "boot image" the right term?

Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com> Tue, 21 August 2018 21:56 UTC

Return-Path: <mjethanandani@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: netconf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netconf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49C21130F04 for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Aug 2018 14:56:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jcYaY0S7JccT for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Aug 2018 14:56:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pf1-x42c.google.com (mail-pf1-x42c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::42c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0E31F130F09 for <netconf@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Aug 2018 14:56:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pf1-x42c.google.com with SMTP id j8-v6so9137189pff.6 for <netconf@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Aug 2018 14:56:28 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=90sWv+0lq9XSoscmPTdTVqhf3MGNINtw4VMUDbvcGJc=; b=YzJYwg9Hlfc+l8K3zF9wVFx8fGJqsLaL8aObKAPxa2vJig/Om80ojlFNB2Emqco/PD fP/SZfNqxhCpd+gYKnS/H2OxJTN9oK6umonSNKN1h3Q8IdsEvyV2sg1ty8BGImBZcNhf 0bEYtev+27sChdFm4zsXfpT+QlEKboD8cV9e+I1Y4JTxWqA7ViAr0tUYZhHLn5WRpQeg 5qGgEyk6pYiTyPFkoG/10ux36gtPhuseiMYhlT4NRxi1bc9n7Sx0eklSXJpInYKaQ4pA moEnZ9aGD6CP6OuNVnlvHn3BlOsSvczo1qjyB3WeV+7XieQq0g0QmcgZh7Z0j5lzZhAN 6jYg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=90sWv+0lq9XSoscmPTdTVqhf3MGNINtw4VMUDbvcGJc=; b=n/dvjnXSkdooyKwBho41hatX339NSZOZPqLy+1HWy6sYuyY5ieL3MA3eyVsSSRl7Sc gELnidSEc+bLwCVBojVl3j8JE8aLhtskQRyTikTMISicdrV+1lpCD2hZAEx+ZD5Mn5ly Bh7P5JdDhd4dXUEkmgje10fnRpPuxUn2ckkPjIxvAdICtuP5Ik9iaXQRO4qDHss6cXPZ ZL8a/1XmXx5nByCQlTyEvAOTTtzAGS/luwR//qZ5tBcBvftUk2TDnfK2M7HtzY+1BOYX 51q4FsxtEd4p5cZrdgb8GMzsq5I2iQ9hbR+bXMle47kY1wY3BeyCZ45W+p9OQ/rRuh3I I8lQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlFLgz84zM7/4xVi+OsjysEuWCv3qUHoWU7k7b8HnBrDnx6toCKm VboqIIXTu3s+1Vd7VDSDBHo=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA+uWPx4lIwo9vW1pO9RoDTaBgzEV5KMVqKeHEwUIpE914J4vhpWWY/qf9eaf07DbCyekgdAssA40w==
X-Received: by 2002:a63:fd06:: with SMTP id d6-v6mr48825622pgh.348.1534888587685; Tue, 21 Aug 2018 14:56:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2601:647:4700:1280:50a0:4d4:47a:4158? ([2601:647:4700:1280:50a0:4d4:47a:4158]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g85-v6sm30863089pfk.39.2018.08.21.14.56.26 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 21 Aug 2018 14:56:27 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <025771A5-6FEF-4C6C-BDE7-8919339F426A@juniper.net>
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2018 14:57:12 -0700
Cc: "netconf@ietf.org" <netconf@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <228BA2F8-A23E-4E2E-A4BB-2C16B08E75DE@gmail.com>
References: <025771A5-6FEF-4C6C-BDE7-8919339F426A@juniper.net>
To: Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/TkEmI1fyMlxAHDXOgXQzhCFfGVE>
Subject: Re: [Netconf] is "boot image" the right term?
X-BeenThere: netconf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
Precedence: list
List-Id: Network Configuration WG mailing list <netconf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netconf>, <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netconf/>
List-Post: <mailto:netconf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf>, <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2018 21:56:32 -0000


> On Aug 21, 2018, at 12:49 PM, Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net> wrote:
> 
> 
> Regarding what the zerotouch draft calls it, a person responsible for JUNOS builds told me that the term "boot image" may not be a good one; that it means different things to different people and will lead to confusion.  
> 
> He suggests "software image" or "software package”.

I would think that boot-image is more descriptive than “software image” or “software package”. Maybe adding a definition of boot-image in the terminology section would alleviate any confusion people might have.

> 
> Does anyone have any thoughts about this?
> 
> Kent // contributor
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Netconf mailing list
> Netconf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf

Mahesh Jethanandani // as contributor.
mjethanandani@gmail.com

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email