Re: [nmrg] Adoption call for draft-li-nmrg-intent-classification-02

[Jérôme François <[e-mail]>]

Dear all,

Speaking as an individual.

It is clearly valuable to have some concrete examples of intents from different 
perspectives. It will help the global understanding of IBN but I have the same 
concerns as others expressed in the mailing list. It is unclear what are the 
criteria of classification and why those criteria have been selected and how much 
representative they are.
As an intent definition can come from different perspectives (technical or 
business for instance), a unique methodology for classification should be proposed 
to integrate all of them. It will be a good value for such a document. Using then 
examples to validate the classification methodology should be more documented with 
references in my opinion.

Best regards
jerome


Le 04/12/2019 à 18:24, Jérôme François a écrit :
> Dear all,
>
> We recently received an RG adoption request for 
> draft-li-nmrg-intent-classification-02 
> (https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-li-nmrg-intent-classification-02.txt)
>
> Please let us know if you support the work becoming a RG document or if you 
> think it should not be adopted. In all cases, provide detailed comments to 
> support your opinion and send them on the mailing list.
>
> This call for adoption is open for two weeks and ends up on 19 December 2019.
>
> The procedure for RG document adoption and important criteria are detailed here: 
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/nmrg/CVEyLUvfxJk1Ud5WdM9Y5LGvQmU
>
> Best regards
> NMRG chairs
> Laurent & Jérôme
>