Re: [Netconf] REminder: deadline Aug 31st: New WGLC for a proposed new WG Charter - respond BEFORE Sept 1st

[Martin Bjorklund <[e-mail]>]

Juergen Schoenwaelder <[e-mail]> wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I am kind of OK with this although I am not sure we really need to
> have RFC6241/6242 implementation/deployment experience published as an
> informational RFC.

+1


/martin



 Even if we decide in Nov/Dec to advance, this does
> not seem to be required (when we moved some of the ISMS documents to
> Draft Standard, having an I-D was good enough).
> 
> But charters can be changed and I hope that we get to a clearer
> consensus what to do and what not to do in Nov/Dec.
> 
> /js
> 
> On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 12:08:00PM +0200, Bert Wijnen (IETF) wrote:
> > Mmm... as far as I can determine, only ONE person has expressed
> > a clear YES I SUPPORT statement.
> > Others have diverged again into discussing "operational-state".
> > Good discussion, but not what we were trying to get consensus on.
> > 
> > Please express your SUPPORT or OBJECTION to the simple and
> > easy charter below. It is a short-term charter with work items
> > that we (seem) to have agreed on.
> > 
> > Additional/other work (on which we have no consensus for the
> > exact direction yet) can be brought to the WG in a normal manner
> > via submitting individual I-Ds and getting the WG to discuss it.
> > We can then  later add that to the charter of we find that the
> > WG is indeed interested in working on such things.
> > 
> > For NOW, PLEASE stick to YES I SUPPORT or NO I OBJECT
> > 
> > Bert
> > 
> > 
> > -------- Original Message --------
> > Subject: [Netconf] New WGLC for a proposed new WG Charter - respond BEFORE Sept 1st
> > Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 00:12:34 +0200
> > From: Bert Wijnen (IETF) <[e-mail]>
> > To: netconf <[e-mail]>
> > 
> > 
> > Based on the comments and feedback and the positions
> > expressed on the mailing list, it is clear that after all
> > we did NOT have consensus on the new WG charter.
> > 
> > Without further ado, this is another proposed WG charter.
> > It focuses on the things that we do seme to have agreement on.
> > 
> > Pls comment and/or express your support or objections
> > no later than August 31, 2012.
> > 
> > OK, new chapter text (omitting the description of what we have
> > achieved sofar):
> > 
> >   In the current phase of the incremental development of NETCONF the
> >   workgroup will focus on following items:
> > 
> >   1. Advance NETCONF over TLS to be in-line with NETCONF 1:1.
> >      This means that RFC5593 needs to be updated.
> > 
> >   2. Based on the implementation, deployment experience and interoperability
> >      testing, the WG will document the status of NETCONF in a report.
> >      Based on this, the WG may decide to make some clarifications to
> >      RFC6241 and RFC6242 (then also fixing any reported errata).
> > 
> >   3. Since Netconf over BEEP and over SOAP seem not being deployed
> >      the WG will write a document that makes those 2 protocols
> >      (RFC4743 and RFC4744) HISTORIC.
> > 
> > Goals and Milestones:
> >   done     - Send with-defaults to IESG for consideration as Proposed Standard
> >   done     - WG Last Call on rfc4741bis
> >   done     - rfc4741bis to IESG for consideration as Proposed Standard
> >   done     - Send rfc4742bis to IESG for consideration as proposed Standard.
> >   done     - first WG draft (rev 00) on NACM posted
> >   done     - first WG draft (rev 00) on NETCONF specific YANG modules posted
> >   done     - WGLC for NACM document
> >   done     - WGLC for NETCONF specific notifications document
> >   done     - submit NACM document to IESG for consideration as Proposed Standard
> >   done     - submit NETCONF specific notifications  document to IESG for
> >              consideration as Proposed Standard
> >   Aug 2012 - submit initial WG draft for rfc5539bis
> >   Aug 2012 - submit initial WG draft for making RFC4743 and RFC4744 historic.
> >   Sep 2012 - WGLC for rfc5539bis
> >   Sep 2012 - WGLC for RFC4743 and 4743 to historic
> >   Oct 2012 - submit rfc5539bis to AD/IESG for consideration as Proposed Standard
> >   Oct 2012 - submit request to AD/IESG to make RFC4743 and 4744 historic
> >   Nov 2012 - Collect Implementation/Deployment reports for RFC6241 and 6242
> >   Dec 2012 - Initial I-D for RFC6241/6242 implementation/deployment experience
> >   Jan 2013 - WGLC on RFC6241/6242 implementation/deployment experience
> >   Feb 2013 - submit RFC6241/6242 implementation/deployment experience doc
> >              to IESG for publication as Informational RFC.
> >   Mar 2013 - Evaluate if more work needs to be done by NETCONF WG or close WG
> > 
> > Bert and Mehmet
> > _______________________________________________
> > Netconf mailing list
> > [e-mail]
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf
> 
> -- 
> Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
> Phone: [phone]         Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany
> Fax:   [phone]         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>
> _______________________________________________
> Netconf mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf
>