Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-wwx-netmod-event-yang-10

Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com> Thu, 24 December 2020 15:48 UTC

Return-Path: <andy@yumaworks.com>
X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E52B3A12CE for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Dec 2020 07:48:28 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.887
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.887 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=yumaworks-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 mOPqjzasgpYO for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Dec 2020 07:48:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lf1-x129.google.com (mail-lf1-x129.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::129]) (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 519763A12CD for <netmod@ietf.org>; Thu, 24 Dec 2020 07:48:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lf1-x129.google.com with SMTP id b26so5472529lff.9 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Thu, 24 Dec 2020 07:48:26 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yumaworks-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=IP/gAPDfKKDz73O0OLWlpq3hwtGaQ5upX1dY7zvuiQM=; b=XFyhY5lE1FAF6FX93jL7/kTSwr1IuAsEEcevwNgYtt40CHdP1tw72wefHUknd6WGxJ 9XiQctSFHJyNah3ASuYc0Fp52gKVuKpKBIvMJW2ECquoYBtr3HIgNC8PcnUOadH6Uo2L Rkwqx41KoAuV0qoFN4OZbdVFLISq4ZjBPShDmsQrDvqxCIJWOTVlFkwfENjVPGOrUDPW 88r+xvQbjWGmbhZiBX/ciyx50qJ1WvQhR+/apYwKy6q1kEcu7tlOKKW595BnX7ocC9Qj ogKw/q4Ebedrl47KI/AL7L2PvKTt87hZvlr5zzSm27V6F32Zw9H0iRA1gJI4ErdjbzOQ QzVA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=IP/gAPDfKKDz73O0OLWlpq3hwtGaQ5upX1dY7zvuiQM=; b=Kcjkmo0NGgykEBnfeO8LBnEw8xKKpq9CFtpZBAP2gdz0lSBjpbj+h52qeNo1S9cHZu ZHqWR9S9mIIWthqr/1W7GuxsXytubWhVOBGN5YYsBfhVAfj1PcwjBSgMAuQd7J6sDhck M0NgJ94ax+Sk/Qzc0iRlMzZYA9f4w5ZK0BJct3jjBMX4NtknxDxX2aNLIX30OY8KiYIM iwiV9ySIPc9YhraRRg/0uOqayH2XYFjW3VeE05GIdor/ghifgVOrXqsEIoYlrOZnEJY+ d5ESyvSGy9ygOnZxKmhQd0HTxzkBWICJOocNh6dLHvgpZ8nvH9Dqjhup5LrRBPT5mamX 4SlA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532M7ymnT++WgFztdqUgUkbF5Z2JXk+AZ7SXq5ZIaEmjTYfj3oyc ++h4MCxaL3f7PIT3omoW4k0pYhG/NrkPHilFeRUYeg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwL8xLnAwwe2dDvmRMoTwNyXOdkQFvQUcgexm9bDYlanx8eYBfH87a9j1QWp3mD+H63gi3+uATdqK5sqUDm7gk=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:8118:: with SMTP id d24mr11833611ljg.105.1608824904043; Thu, 24 Dec 2020 07:48:24 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <f836c5b2-ebc5-2775-ca60-3e888f12788c@labn.net> <CAB75xn6OoL63hyOpMJ=BcmVvnTiZHNskMDyQF6H54AafT7Q7Dw@mail.gmail.com> <AM7PR07MB6248FC667BA42C839086153BA0DE0@AM7PR07MB6248.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <CABCOCHQRfm0ZnTTeKR43ki0fTGJi037hV83EjDaTO2xO+u64DA@mail.gmail.com> <20201223180852.rnif4ioc3tovvwkv@anna.jacobs.jacobs-university.de> <20201224082431.fkz2fvitsq7r6a26@anna.jacobs.jacobs-university.de>
In-Reply-To: <20201224082431.fkz2fvitsq7r6a26@anna.jacobs.jacobs-university.de>
From: Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 07:48:13 -0800
Message-ID: <CABCOCHQOpyh=scQt4vN2sS=S1stF69+9zMPY_eQJahUO51x7sg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>, NETMOD Group <netmod@ietf.org>, Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>, Alex Clemm <ludwig@clemm.org>, "B. Claise" <bclaise@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000e9699405b737bcc7"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/Dc4kDINUVseKWmMqgciX0O_Xg8U>
Subject: Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-wwx-netmod-event-yang-10
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETMOD WG list <netmod.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netmod/>
List-Post: <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 15:48:28 -0000

On Thu, Dec 24, 2020 at 12:24 AM Juergen Schoenwaelder <
j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de> wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 23, 2020 at 07:08:52PM +0100, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
> >
> > ECA work has a long 20+ year tradition in the IETF and several
> > specifications have been published over the years by various working
> > groups. As far as I can tell, none of them got traction in terms of
> > signifiant deployment of interoperable implementations.
> >
> > I would have hoped that the next iteration of ECA work would have
> > started with a deep reflection about why all the previous attempts
> > failed to gain traction and some genuine insights how to design things
> > differently in order to improve the likelihood to have impact.
> >
>
> Let me be a bit more explicit.
>
> I would have expected that the senior IETF people mentioned as
> co-authors or contributors, who are very well familiar with the
> relevant history (Benoit Claise, Andy Bierman, Alex Clemm), would have
> explained here (or in the document) why this approach to create an
> interoperable standard for ECA has potential to succeed given the
> limited success of the prior attempts.
>
> Adopting this work without having answered this question seems
> premature. If the proponents of this work do not have an answer to
> this question, the WG will likely not find one either.
>
>
I do not support adoption of this draft, but do not object if others
want to spend time working on it. The current draft is way too complex and
not implementable.
I suspect many who supported adoption meant they are happy for somebody
else to "finish"
the draft (but they do not have time for that).

IMO this is an area where running code really matters.

We should be standardizing the "trailing edge": multiple independent
non-standard solutions
exist and the IETF creates a "best-hits" standard.

We should be avoiding Ivory Tower "leading edge" standards where design
teams decide how
the world SHOULD work, and there is no running code to back up the theory.


Andy



/js
>
> --
> Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
> Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
> Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <https://www.jacobs-university.de/>
>