[netconf] Regarding 108 adoption hums

Kent Watsen <kent+ietf@watsen.net> Wed, 05 August 2020 22:13 UTC

Return-Path: <01000173c0afb995-d6003a0a-edbd-4113-b3e6-9092d30ec2a7-000000@amazonses.watsen.net>
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 5C1263A0522 for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Aug 2020 15:13:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=amazonses.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 6CEMZ4Dc61wl for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Aug 2020 15:13:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from a8-88.smtp-out.amazonses.com (a8-88.smtp-out.amazonses.com [54.240.8.88]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 06A533A0474 for <netconf@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Aug 2020 15:13:29 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/simple; s=224i4yxa5dv7c2xz3womw6peuasteono; d=amazonses.com; t=1596665608; h=From:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Mime-Version:Subject:Message-Id:Date:To:Feedback-ID; bh=3dIe80nNVoQ+6mHALsKY2RKlagFzIwIGSTAZF19xAQI=; b=LWw64mPm/ntrPuJmoHFAFWgZWEjXmr0hSnXhz3w2v4fjinPDGQHMDvu09wvmNZOA SrahwCXRlJ8jNIUvcHOzfNBGhNbZlKb6dwh+FZZWJUY2c9d7ZCTfiQ2EYkpm0XDg0K8 Amq1CY8LoMVd8Sak/ibOzfFguBH3q32Xdw+tPIHU=
From: Kent Watsen <kent+ietf@watsen.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.80.23.2.2\))
Message-ID: <01000173c0afb995-d6003a0a-edbd-4113-b3e6-9092d30ec2a7-000000@us-east-1.amazonses.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2020 22:13:28 +0000
To: "netconf@ietf.org" <netconf@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.80.23.2.2)
X-SES-Outgoing: 2020.08.05-54.240.8.88
Feedback-ID: 1.us-east-1.DKmIRZFhhsBhtmFMNikgwZUWVrODEw9qVcPhqJEI2DA=:AmazonSES
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/jMbQ9X-qSBmh7UN9lJVzwcHkuN0>
Subject: [netconf] Regarding 108 adoption hums
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: Wed, 05 Aug 2020 22:13:31 -0000

NETCONF WG,


The Chairs & AD discussed the results of the various adoption hums conducted during the 108 meeting.  There is a sense that the results didn’t adequately determine if the drafts should be adopted.  In particular, it wasn’t clear if the hums reflected a general desire to solve the problem or support for the particular draft.

As such, we’ve decided to send subsequent emails for each draft, or set of drafts if appropriate, to solicit input on following questions:

    1) is the problem important for the NETCONF WG to solve?
    2) is the draft a suitable basis for the work?


NETCONF Chairs