Re: [Rtg-yang-coord] I-D Action: draft-openconfig-mpls-consolidated-model-00.txt

[Lou Berger <[e-mail]>]

On 3/19/2015 6:04 AM, Loa Andersson wrote:
> All,
>
> This of course triggered the obvious question - "What is your plan"?
>
> So what I'd like to to see for draft-openconfig-mpls-consolidated-model
> discussions in Dallas is
>
> - that the discussion on the overall structure goes to the rtgwg
>
> - that the technology specific parts are discussed in the relevant
>    working group; it see the following wg's that (should) have an
>    interest in this
>    - teas
>    - mpls
>    - spring
>    - i2rs (?), this might be more of an interest in the overall
>      structure.
>
> For mpls this discussion will take place on Friday, if we during the
> week can agree on a plan forward, and we need time to socialize that
> I think there are a few minutes available in the mpls meeting do that.

So the general questions I see / have, which are wider than the scope of
this draft, are:
1. how does the whole control plane (including te+non-te signaling and
routing) picture fit together and relate to other/existing models?
2. how do all the different topology/service models fit together?
3. What is the commonality in the data plane models of MPLS and GMPLS
(LSPs)? 
   (Yes this assumes that there isn't a full model per controlled
technology.)
 
I think different WGs are/can be involved in addressing these.  As I
said before, I personally care more about these being discussed then
where they are discussed.  I like your plan as it provides a place to
catch any topics not already covered earlier in the week.

In the interim, it would be good to start on the actual discussions on
this (or whichever appropriate) list.

Lou
> /Loa
>
>
>
> On 2015-03-19 10:24, Loa Andersson wrote:
>> Folks,
>>
>> I have not seen any reaction to this, what is the plan?
>>
>> /Loa
>>
>> On 2015-03-18 17:45, Lou Berger wrote:
>>> Sounds like there's a plan afoot to give rtgwg time to discuss this
>>> thread/draft (as well as relive some of the overall time constraints. )
>>>    My understanding is that the overall structure  &  base document will
>>> be discussed there, while the other WG-specific information / sub-models
>>> (e.g., LDP, RSVP, TE, SR, ...) will covered in their respective WGs.
>>>
>>> Alia/ADs/Authors,
>>>
>>> Can you confirm?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Lou
>>>
>>> On 3/17/2015 12:35 PM, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote:
>>>> RTGWG agenda is already jam packed - no room for any additions.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Rtg-yang-coord mailing list
>>> [e-mail]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtg-yang-coord
>>>