Re: [OPSAWG] WG adoption call for draft-song-opsawg-ifit-framework-09

Hi Tianran,
> Hi Benoit,
>
> My last question was only to check if there is enough interest on this 
> work, not an adoption call. There was q&a after the presentation. And 
> Joe cut the line because of the time.
>
> Now this is an adoption call. You are free to suggest or object.
I just did :-)

Regards, B.
> And we believe debate is really helpful.
>
> Cheers,
> Tianran
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Sent from WeLink
>
> *发件人： *Benoit Claise<bclaise@cisco.com <mailto:bclaise@cisco.com>>
> *收件人： *Tianran Zhou<zhoutianran@huawei.com 
> <mailto:zhoutianran@huawei.com>>;opsawg<opsawg@ietf.org 
> <mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>>;draft-song-opsawg-ifit-framework.authors<draft-song-opsawg-ifit-framework.authors@ietf.org 
> <mailto:draft-song-opsawg-ifit-framework.authors@ietf.org>>
> *抄送： *opsawg-chairs<opsawg-chairs@ietf.org 
> <mailto:opsawg-chairs@ietf.org>>
> *主题： *Re: [OPSAWG] WG adoption call for 
> draft-song-opsawg-ifit-framework-09
> *时间： *2019-12-17 20:56:58
>
> Dear all,
>
> After reviewing themeeting minutes 
> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-106-opsawg/>, I was a little 
> bit puzzled. From my recollection, Joe and Frank had some good 
> feedback on the draft.
> Also, in the minutes, I did not see any mention of Joe's feedback. And 
> Frank's feedback on the draft is summarized as 4 words: "the scope is 
> large"
> So I went back and reviewed the youtube video 
> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rY-u8177wpU>.
>
> I support Frank's feedback that this document scope is too large: a 
> mix of an inventory of what exists, a set of requirements, and 
> specifications/framework. I'm wondering: what is the scope of this 
> document? Before we clarify this, I don't think we should adopt this 
> document.
>
> The OPSAWG chair questions at the end of the presentation were:
> 	Chair: How many of you have read this document? quite a lot.
> 	Chair: How many of you think this is a useful work and the working group could
> 	work on it? still many, 20+.
> I was waiting for the negative question but to my surprise, it never 
> came...
> 	Chair: How many of you don't think ...
> If that question would have been asked, I would have come to mic. or 
> at least raised my hand.
>
> It's important to make a distinction between the interest to solve 
> those problems (I believe we have full agreement) and whether this 
> document is a good starting point. I object to the latter, with the 
> document in the current form.
>
> Regards, Benoit
>>
>> Hi WG,
>>
>> On IETF 106 meeting, wesaw predominant interest and support to this 
>> draft, especially from operators. The authors then resolved all the 
>> open issues.
>>
>> As requested by the authors, this email starts a 2 weeks working 
>> group adoption call for draft-song-opsawg-ifit-framework-09.
>>
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-song-opsawg-ifit-framework/
>>
>> If you support adopting this document please say so, and please give 
>> an indication of why you think it is important. Also please say if 
>> you will be willing to review and help the draft.
>>
>> If you do not support adopting this document as a starting point to 
>> work on, please say why.
>>
>> This poll will run until Dec 23..
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Tianran as co-chair
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OPSAWG mailing list
>> OPSAWG@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
>