Re: [netmod] FW: New Version Notification for draft-chairs-netmod-opstate-reqs-00.txt

Jonathan,
> Looking in from outside the current problem domain I'm not sure I'm 
> sufficiently informed to comment, however I have a couple of queries:
>
>  1. The requirements talk about both synchronous and asynchronous
>     systems (1(D), 3, 3(A)) but really only address the behaviour for
>     asynchronous systems. Would it not be worth clarifying the
>     relationship between the intended and applied configurations for
>     synchronous systems (i.e. they are the same), hence there is no
>     need for synchronous requirements equivalent to 1(D) and 3(A)?
>  2. Why does 7(A) limit the scope to IETF-defined modules of others
>     are now defining YANG modules?
>
Good point. We need to provide guidance for the other SDOs.

Regards, Benoit
> Thanks,
>
> Jonathan
>
>
>     ----- Original Message -----
>     From:
>     "Kent Watsen" <kwatsen@juniper.net>
>
>     To:
>     "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
>     Cc:
>
>     Sent:
>     Fri, 11 Sep 2015 22:16:40 +0000
>     Subject:
>     [netmod] FW: New Version Notification for
>     draft-chairs-netmod-opstate-reqs-00.txt
>
>
>
>     The AD and chairs thought it best to formalize the consensus on the
>     requirements a bit more. So we created the I-D listed below to
>     track and
>     capture final consensus.
>
>     Additionally, we want to use this GitHub issue tracker to track
>     issues:
>
>     https://github.com/netmod-wg/opstate-reqs/issues
>
>     Consistent with Tom's earlier email, we want to collect any issues
>     with
>     these requirements before EOB Monday, September 14, 2015 at 5PM
>     EST. If
>     you have an issue, in addition to posting it to the list, please
>     consider
>     adding it to the GitHub tracker, and let people know you did so. Our
>     goal is to close the issues as quickly as possible, some will go
>     to DEAD
>     while others may remain OPEN, based on WG consensus.
>
>     Thanks,
>     Kent & Tom
>
>
>     On 9/11/15, 5:36 PM, "internet-drafts@ietf.org"
>     <internet-drafts@ietf.org>
>     wrote:
>
>     >
>     >A new version of I-D, draft-chairs-netmod-opstate-reqs-00.txt
>     >has been successfully submitted by Kent Watsen and posted to the
>     >IETF repository.
>     >
>     >Name: draft-chairs-netmod-opstate-reqs
>     >Revision: 00
>     >Title: NETMOD Operational State Requirements
>     >Document date: 2015-09-11
>     >Group: Individual Submission
>     >Pages: 5
>     >URL:
>     >https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-chairs-netmod-opstate-reqs-00.t
>     >xt
>     >Status:
>     >https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-chairs-netmod-opstate-reqs/
>     >Htmlized:
>     >https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-chairs-netmod-opstate-reqs-00
>     >
>     >
>     >Abstract:
>     > This document captures consensus on operational state
>     requirements by
>     > the NETMOD working group.
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     >Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of
>     >submission
>     >until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
>     >
>     >The IETF Secretariat
>     >
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     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