Re: [netconf] Adoption call for draft-kwatsen-netconf-http-client-server-04

Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com> Thu, 14 November 2019 09:14 UTC

Return-Path: <mbj@tail-f.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 44333120232; Thu, 14 Nov 2019 01:14:39 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 yYu3HKe9oRnK; Thu, 14 Nov 2019 01:14:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.tail-f.com (mail.tail-f.com [46.21.102.45]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36FE01200E5; Thu, 14 Nov 2019 01:14:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (unknown [173.38.220.41]) by mail.tail-f.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BCE681AE0312; Thu, 14 Nov 2019 10:14:36 +0100 (CET)
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2019 10:14:06 +0100 (CET)
Message-Id: <20191114.101406.2087098792700938588.mbj@tail-f.com>
To: kent+ietf@watsen.net
Cc: bill.wu@huawei.com, ietfc@btconnect.com, rwilton@cisco.com, httpbis-chairs@ietf.org, netconf@ietf.org
From: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
In-Reply-To: <0100016e68049a12-bcb2acea-a4e2-42f9-8eab-05bab261d5dd-000000@email.amazonses.com>
References: <B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABAA94180FF@dggeml511-mbx.china.huawei.com> <0100016e68049a12-bcb2acea-a4e2-42f9-8eab-05bab261d5dd-000000@email.amazonses.com>
X-Mailer: Mew version 6.8 on Emacs 25.2
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/hBJ-l0PE4_2NxHoMXuyKPn-Txv8>
Subject: Re: [netconf] Adoption call for draft-kwatsen-netconf-http-client-server-04
X-BeenThere: netconf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETCONF WG 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: Thu, 14 Nov 2019 09:14:39 -0000

Hi,

Kent Watsen <kent+ietf@watsen.net> wrote:
> 
> Folks,
> 
> It seems that the rough consensus is to rename the draft.  Being a WG
> document and me, a dutiful Editor, I'm happy to oblige.  Assuming
> adoption can proceed with this understanding, I'll make the change
> when submitting the -00.  As for the specific name, there is no great
> fallback, but perhaps s/http/web/ or s/http/rest/ (i.e.,
> draft-ietf-netconf-web-client-server)?  We can decide in Singapore.

There's a thread in opsawg about renaming drafts...  Conclusion (I
think): keep the name of the draft, but change the title and name of
the module.

> As the dissenter in the rough, let the record show that there is no
> concrete technical reason to rename anything, and efforts to get
> clarifications have be left unanswered.  If there are issues, renaming
> won't make them go away

If the name is too generic, and the issue is that the content is more
specific than the name suggests, then renaming can help resolving the
issue.

> and, in any case, renaming to anything other
> than the name of the protocol layer is both unhelpful and confusing.
> I hereby request that the shepherd writeup captures this sentiment as
> well.
> 
> Kent // contributor


/martin