Re: [OPSAWG] 🔔 WG Adoption Call for draft-feng-opsawg-incident-management-04

Dear OPSAWG Chairs, NMOP Chairs, all,

As the co-author of the TMF 724 Incident Management API profile, I am very happy to see this standardization process in IETF.

I have reviewed the latest version of the draft-feng-opsawg-incident-management-04 and I can confirm that:

  *   the terminology used for the definition of Network Incident is aligned with the terminology used in the TMF724 API profile.
  *   the Yang data model included in this IETF draft is technically aligned with the information model of the incident described in the TMF724 API profile.

Please note that if a formal letter from TMF acknowledging this alignment is required we would need to follow the liaison process.  In any case, it would be of great interest to formally collaborate further in this area (again via a liaison statement) as IETF yang models are very complementary to our TMF724 Incident API.

I have also been asked whether IETF can get access to this TMF specification.  My understanding is that currently TMF published specifications are only available to TMF members.  However, if IETF wants to reference this work, I am happy to discuss it with the TMF responsible person to see how to make it publicly available.

Regards,

Fernando Camacho

-----邮件原件-----

发件人: OPSAWG [mailto:opsawg-bounces@ietf.org] 代表 Henk Birkholz

发送时间: 2024年2月29日 14:45

收件人: opsawg@ietf.org; nmop-chairs@ietf.org

主题: Re: [OPSAWG] 🔔 WG Adoption Call for draft-feng-opsawg-incident-management-04

Dear OPSAWG members,

this email concludes the call for Working Group Adoption on https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-feng-opsawg-incident-management-04.

We received a significant amount of positive replies, a few elaborate comments, and most importantly the notion that this work should be considered for adoption in the NMOP WG.

There were also a few concerns about access to some work by other bodies that must be accounted in this I-D. Strong collaboration with other bodies must happen to ensure terminology consistency (avoiding the definition of subtly different or conflicting semantics).

The OPSAWG chairs believe this I-D is ready for adoption. If the NMOP chairs agree they can inherit the result of the WG adoption call or issues a complementary one on the NMOP list, referring to the results of this WG adoption call.

For the OPSAWG co-chairs,

Henk

On 08.02.24 16:44, Henk Birkholz wrote:

> Dear OPSAWG members,

>

> this email starts a call for Working Group Adoption of

>

>> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-feng-opsawg-incident-management

>> -04.html

>

> ending on Thursday, February 22nd.

>

> As a reminder, this I-D specifies a YANG Module for Incident Management.

> Incidents in this context are scoped to unexpected yet quantifiable

> adverse effects detected in a network service. The majority of the

> document provides background and motivation for the structure of the

> YANG Module that is in support of reporting, diagnosing, and

> mitigating the detected adverse effects.

>

> The chairs acknowledge some positive feedback on the list and a

> positive poll result at IETF118. We would like to gather feedback from

> the WG if there is interest to further contribute and review.

>

> Please reply with your support and especially any substantive comments

> you may have.

>

>

> For the OPSAWG co-chairs,

>

> Henk

>

> _______________________________________________

> OPSAWG mailing list

> OPSAWG@ietf.org

> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

_______________________________________________

OPSAWG mailing list

OPSAWG@ietf.org

https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg