Re: [netmod] WG adoption poll - instance-data

Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net> Tue, 09 October 2018 17:07 UTC

Return-Path: <kwatsen@juniper.net>
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 62F5113136B; Tue, 9 Oct 2018 10:07:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.156
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.156 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.456, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, 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=juniper.net
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 FDHOS1vABNo9; Tue, 9 Oct 2018 10:07:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com (mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com [67.231.152.164]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D34B13135D; Tue, 9 Oct 2018 10:07:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0108161.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w99H3wnJ031273; Tue, 9 Oct 2018 10:07:09 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=juniper.net; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=PPS1017; bh=DAf1LHmfTCy0Q2BrQYQcNKAksH6BTpMkSyAIWODSFWo=; b=J5fpjd8T9KWZvnCfPPWhEtKUZqGwaE1XGyx7n49s/5E1CBRPs3vimXdV7b6I9w94D0Fp m3/fO8eUWPMGstqH34U9ibZzQ6ijNzF830kcUppK5YcxqevE39KRiwM5L+KZ5lqekWhA 0XFh7sZfBPRxBBkCqzQqvdKhYRvKMOhT50qKizTitB2etIx2e+LQ8Qh47wUog5rbfNFe 7MIdVHzm3EdEHMZ99zuO0n9fqiAFeKzvM/DF5f7cGa58n9jYmM6hF3hJ9SUkJIoLiuxl J4jWb6d3ns9uUcCE+lwjfzqd2ghBH6KQMc4RV64ps6eTzb1FVDCeRJP8S7S3E5eqCuWw 9Q==
Received: from nam03-co1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-co1nam03lp0017.outbound.protection.outlook.com [216.32.181.17]) by mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2n0s0pgxa7-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 09 Oct 2018 10:07:09 -0700
Received: from BYAPR05MB4664.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (52.135.233.78) by BYAPR05MB3944.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (52.135.195.147) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.1228.20; Tue, 9 Oct 2018 17:07:06 +0000
Received: from BYAPR05MB4664.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::d45d:b92d:3e87:ef9f]) by BYAPR05MB4664.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::d45d:b92d:3e87:ef9f%3]) with mapi id 15.20.1228.020; Tue, 9 Oct 2018 17:07:06 +0000
From: Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net>
To: =?utf-8?B?QmFsw6F6cyBMZW5neWVs?= <balazs.lengyel@ericsson.com>, Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
CC: "netmod-chairs@ietf.org" <netmod-chairs@ietf.org>, "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [netmod] WG adoption poll - instance-data
Thread-Index: AQHUX8nMLYBabqUYMUGHSNnOTu5UwaUW1qUAgAAtDgD//97AgA==
Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2018 17:07:06 +0000
Message-ID: <652D49CE-6469-412F-B708-D8496DFC0F16@juniper.net>
References: <b8f163ea-ea33-53a6-3fac-944b8d6c03ec@labn.net> <20181009.125822.1764836266889190398.mbj@tail-f.com> <58f8baa5-320c-a75e-62ef-e277d488b962@ericsson.com> <20181009.142506.637283350958767455.mbj@tail-f.com> <9e389747-74ed-0f62-24ce-813ce3cdc870@ericsson.com>
In-Reply-To: <9e389747-74ed-0f62-24ce-813ce3cdc870@ericsson.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/10.10.2.180910
x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.10]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BYAPR05MB3944; 6:vChS/Cb0HnQgKjHLxDz488ip134uQM0Ji+EicGqLU5VBrdroICN4DNFOWNa4/0kHFZhYjW8Ngnyvixfm8Kt7FoistKuZAYzbAfM/OgLtISCuwneMDcWtLWJvCF7bGP4nc5Yfl6F3eyJmriuZ9d5/TWkNAU85H+Ufk/gXzPElhZwekmakJC9qIBJFprmV1ZtHSX0QueLieIxshkUAp320JIv6rdy9iiuv5WZiBhq058hnbtIqL4i0gj/mXLzPt+CpZMmrIRY7FtpPCEGC1jvQshpXKe7hrUVz4PAl7ep/N25mSN8oagzoThpLYPyykvo5NEPCXOm2IxQ2p3DIzzHDcVlZ7rORTSxBYtCE5O9xq6ZhQOH3QXhguq3/o0benXgFerQXTXX8PhrGWws8j3QcBqWFk1WLJ9+YyeLJxm1JA0A6uAdsct4dGT17v1U0YKoVSLvyRUv2oQon622HmnsEgQ==; 5:MFd4K3GAIQkm5XBusAjAcEtrk6hzA7rmOoVRZ8GJhSmgIBGXQmHpWG/7aNBQUGSI/1xT797/4+y+Or1Rp7dstBZNwEYPq0xDO6LUGSYWa6BNGsPRB/X7hVJS/4kE9zVpPnIPWHsrN0dPvNaM71PUNx68PgFqDs5Qjz2U0OehQao=; 7:guVHgQ13ntlProaDTRDoXalfhaTN5FuZmCW9owHNeP+dsZIf8tJcWcMNe88YJH0jXHbGyJNgZidWfGV2muAts0+N0SXIT6BJxzEMgVlKnQrgx35GuMGGGch3wztkQf7AXC8Kl9W6UbP5kvN1MpgPYKTEhfMy/rIoZwl4AO/j5SoaYgf2lyqNed2X8GpSO9XoWKVcC7Ysezarf+X42Fb/rBUfA8wzV3JgcRF9gqZhqNly67b/2Oa75VWms/+ZLObI
x-ms-exchange-antispam-srfa-diagnostics: SOS;
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: ff6fee22-0f89-4a99-dffa-08d62e09a43c
x-ms-office365-filtering-ht: Tenant
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(5600074)(711020)(4618075)(2017052603328)(7153060)(7193020); SRVR:BYAPR05MB3944;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BYAPR05MB3944:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BYAPR05MB3944D27CB2765434294863BBA5E70@BYAPR05MB3944.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(158342451672863)(37575265505322)(248295561703944);
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(8211001083)(6040522)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(3002001)(3231355)(944501410)(52105095)(10201501046)(93006095)(93001095)(6055026)(149066)(150057)(6041310)(201703131423095)(201702281528075)(20161123555045)(201703061421075)(201703061406153)(20161123562045)(20161123558120)(20161123564045)(20161123560045)(201708071742011)(7699051)(76991055); SRVR:BYAPR05MB3944; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BYAPR05MB3944;
x-forefront-prvs: 08200063E9
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(366004)(346002)(396003)(39860400002)(136003)(376002)(199004)(189003)(13464003)(252514010)(102836004)(6486002)(4326008)(8936002)(66574009)(81156014)(33656002)(229853002)(53546011)(6506007)(6512007)(6306002)(11346002)(68736007)(5250100002)(446003)(6436002)(26005)(2900100001)(53936002)(36756003)(66066001)(8676002)(93886005)(83716004)(2906002)(99286004)(81166006)(71190400001)(71200400001)(76176011)(86362001)(3846002)(5660300001)(6116002)(54906003)(110136005)(58126008)(105586002)(186003)(106356001)(6246003)(25786009)(486006)(14444005)(82746002)(97736004)(966005)(478600001)(256004)(14454004)(2616005)(7736002)(476003)(316002)(305945005); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BYAPR05MB3944; H:BYAPR05MB4664.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: xeVENQRRGiJaZAnC3KmeHd6dnOBTsXByxjoKZ9xS8GPh9msKojj0t+2ObEXnZfe3UALnYs3w/ZTJNxxSgCZ/vUmudI9nJcQ/zDnv7f7DmCrn748kNa+ARPGs/CqSPqoaQC4aP3mQ2/G8EODBhZ1fZCdjSpTbI34z/BSM+wwjgm+S2mmOLNgwSSppfHs/6HTrdRzMljcGUaVENKHJ8iHN+Fm2iVujAxP6RglKE41B3vVevlknFdVM8xc1PjcHNNZyYBhGdA3FEfj/cxbj2XbNeReFtQMcgWLHkadXIqwqSYfqgqmiWw4/mUdO/eph2DHGOHfGggLTawcv3Z/dqAUnAytSbKiQPrRCM74Vcl6tDEc=
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <3A32D1CF90289A4FB35DC19CBB5F932F@namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: ff6fee22-0f89-4a99-dffa-08d62e09a43c
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 09 Oct 2018 17:07:06.2658 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BYAPR05MB3944
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2018-10-09_11:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_spam_notspam policy=outbound_spam score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1807170000 definitions=main-1810090165
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/v6clTPih9tFh1bCKKSgrIjQ2faY>
Subject: Re: [netmod] WG adoption poll - instance-data
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: Tue, 09 Oct 2018 17:07:16 -0000

As co-chair, I have two minds:

  1) requests a fix and redo the adoption poll
  2) realize that it's a living doc and regardless
     how it begins, the WG can sort it out in time.
     i.e., we're adopting to work on the problem,
     not necessarily the specific solution.

While (1) seems more proper, given the timing of 
things, I'm willing to go for (2).   To this extent,
the comments being made now be thought to carry
the same weight as Last Call comments.  The chairs
will discuss this again when making a determination
on the adoption poll.

As contributor, can we please not call this "YANG
instance data"?  - that means something else to 
me.  This seems to be more about capturing data
about a server instances.  So maybe "YANG-based
Server Instance Data"?  (open to suggestions!)

Kent



-----Original Message-----
From: netmod <netmod-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Balázs Lengyel <balazs.lengyel@ericsson.com>
Date: Tuesday, October 9, 2018 at 11:06 AM
To: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
Cc: "netmod-chairs@ietf.org" <netmod-chairs@ietf.org>rg>, "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [netmod] WG adoption poll - instance-data

OK, If the chairs are happy with that, I can update the document before 
I store it as an official netmod document.

regards Balazs

On 2018. 10. 09. 14:25, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Balázs Lengyel <balazs.lengyel@ericsson.com> wrote:
>> Hello Martin,
>>
>> I agree that this document shall be about defining the file format,
>> and server capabilities shall only be a use-case.)
>>
>> I already took out a lot of text, that explicitly recommended using
>> instance data for documenting capabilities. Server capabilities are
>> only mentioned in the introduction chapter.
>> As you wrote: There is no _normative_  specification of how a server
>> would document its capabilities, because this is
>> what the WG requested, so I removed it.
> Hmm.  Ok, if this is what the WG wants, then it is fine to just have
> server capabilities as an example use case.  (I thought that the WG
> wanted a normative description of server capabilities...)
>
>> I see that I forgot to change the title and the introduction can be
>> reworded to make
>> it more clear that documenting server capabilities is just a use-case.
>> (I still see it as the primary use-case for instance data.)
> I think all text in 2 Introduction (except the last para) in this case
> should be moved to section 2.1, and new text should be written in 2.
>
> (*if* there will be a separate doc for server capabilities, the text
> in 2 should be moved to that doc instead.)
>
>>   If I promise to change the title and clarify the introduction can you
>> support adoption?
> First of all I'd like to ensure that the WG in fact just wants to do
> the file format.  Since people have expressed support for adopting the
> draft with the current title, I'm not so sure that this is the case.
>
> I think you should make those changes, and I support the adoption of
> the modified document.  I don't see any reason not to make these
> chanegs before posting as a WG doc.
>
>
> /martin
>
>
>
>> regards Balazs
>>
>> On 2018. 10. 09. 12:58, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I still think that this draft should either be split into two, one for
>>> specifiying the generic file format (ok with examples), and one for
>>> "Documenting Server Capabilities", or the document should just be
>>> about the file format (+ *examples*).
>>>
>>> [The current document mixes the two; it's a bit as if we had "The
>>> YANG language and a model for interfaces" as one doc...]
>>>
>>> It is clear that the document specifies a file format for YANG
>>> instance data, which is good.  But it is not clear if the document
>>> intends to specify how a server should document its capabilities.
>>>
>>> The Introduction mainly talks about why it is important to document
>>> server capabilities.  But then AFAICT there is no normative
>>> specification of how a server would document its capabilities.
>>>
>>>
>>> /martin
>>>
>>>
>>> Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> wrote:
>>>> All,
>>>>
>>>> This is start of a two week poll on making
>>>> draft-lengyel-netmod-yang-instance-data-04 a working group
>>>> document. Please send email to the list indicating "yes/support" or
>>>> "no/do not support".  If indicating no, please state your reservations
>>>> with the document.  If yes, please also feel free to provide comments
>>>> you'd like to see addressed once the document is a WG document.
>>>>
>>>> The poll ends Oct 22.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Lou (and co-chairs)
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> netmod mailing list
>>>> netmod@ietf.org
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> netmod mailing list
>>> netmod@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>>>
>> -- 
>> Balazs Lengyel                       Ericsson Hungary Ltd.
>> Senior Specialist
>> Mobile: +36-70-330-7909 email: Balazs.Lengyel@ericsson.com
>>
>>
-- 
Balazs Lengyel                       Ericsson Hungary Ltd.
Senior Specialist
Mobile: +36-70-330-7909              email: Balazs.Lengyel@ericsson.com