Re: [Rtg-yang-coord] Routing YANG Design Team Scope

Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de> Thu, 30 July 2015 12:44 UTC

Return-Path: <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
X-Original-To: rtg-yang-coord@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtg-yang-coord@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 200CD1A88AC; Thu, 30 Jul 2015 05:44:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.86
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.86 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 LEd7nP3xNKEd; Thu, 30 Jul 2015 05:44:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from atlas3.jacobs-university.de (atlas3.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 51FF81A8884; Thu, 30 Jul 2015 05:44:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (demetrius5.irc-it.jacobs-university.de [10.70.0.222]) by atlas3.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86830122C; Thu, 30 Jul 2015 14:44:08 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at jacobs-university.de
Received: from atlas3.jacobs-university.de ([10.70.0.220]) by localhost (demetrius5.jacobs-university.de [10.70.0.222]) (amavisd-new, port 10030) with ESMTP id 0GSUbl72-5CR; Thu, 30 Jul 2015 14:44:08 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de (hermes.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "hermes.jacobs-university.de", Issuer "Jacobs University CA - G01" (verified OK)) by atlas3.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Thu, 30 Jul 2015 14:44:08 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from localhost (demetrius1.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.46]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DD992004E; Thu, 30 Jul 2015 14:44:11 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at jacobs-university.de
Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de ([212.201.44.23]) by localhost (demetrius1.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.32]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5zbyFa-tlLkX; Thu, 30 Jul 2015 14:44:09 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from elstar.local (elstar.jacobs.jacobs-university.de [10.50.231.133]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD24F20045; Thu, 30 Jul 2015 14:44:09 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by elstar.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id 09CB235F5F09; Thu, 30 Jul 2015 14:44:06 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 14:44:05 +0200
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
To: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
Message-ID: <20150730124403.GA16833@elstar.local>
Mail-Followup-To: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>, Rob Shakir <rjs@rob.sh>, "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>, Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com>, YANG Doctors <yang-doctors@ietf.org>, RTG Yang Coordination <rtg-yang-coord@ietf.org>, Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>
References: <D1DAB06D.298C6%acee@cisco.com> <etPan.55b60a41.3b25a484.755b@piccolo.local> <20150730091828.GC16332@elstar.local> <55BA0B16.3000400@labn.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <55BA0B16.3000400@labn.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-yang-coord/7STc2aydeksRpCECSjrNRv-Bd3w>
Cc: RTG Yang Coordination <rtg-yang-coord@ietf.org>, Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com>, YANG Doctors <yang-doctors@ietf.org>, Rob Shakir <rjs@rob.sh>, "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>, Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>
Subject: Re: [Rtg-yang-coord] Routing YANG Design Team Scope
X-BeenThere: rtg-yang-coord@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
List-Id: "\"List to discuss coordination between the Routing related YANG models\"" <rtg-yang-coord.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtg-yang-coord>, <mailto:rtg-yang-coord-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rtg-yang-coord/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtg-yang-coord@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtg-yang-coord-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtg-yang-coord>, <mailto:rtg-yang-coord-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 12:44:15 -0000

On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 07:31:34AM -0400, Lou Berger wrote:
> 
> > Being old fashioned, I
> > believe the place to have this discussions that affects 'network
> > management going forward' is the OPS area.
> 
> So this can be read to mean that you are saying that all YANG model
> definitions and discussions, as they "affect network management", should
> take place in the OPS area.  Is this a correct interpretation?

No.

> If so, this isn't a particular scalable approach and doesn't reflect how the
> IETF has done things in the past.  If you are saying that changes to
> YANG, netconf, restconf, ..., must be discussed in the OPS area, then I
> completely agree.

I am saying that if RFCs are affected that were done in the OPS area,
then I think it is good idea to explain to the OPS area why they are
not good enough. Except in special cases, I also think that WGs that
produced an RFC ars the default place to discuss shortcomings of an
RFC. This is perhaps formally not required since everything belongs to
the IETF but still I believe this is a good approach to avoid flapping
(trying to use routing vocabular here, I might fail badly with it).

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>