Re: [Teas] Alvaro Retana's No Objection on draft-ietf-teas-actn-info-model-09: (with COMMENT)

Leeyoung <leeyoung@huawei.com> Tue, 19 June 2018 21:05 UTC

Return-Path: <leeyoung@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: teas@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: teas@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5D48130F2C; Tue, 19 Jun 2018 14:05:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.198
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.198 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HK_RANDOM_ENVFROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 uJ39IaDZ0Kwp; Tue, 19 Jun 2018 14:05:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 40FFD130E09; Tue, 19 Jun 2018 14:05:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhreml704-cah.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.107]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id E3BABAE9582C5; Tue, 19 Jun 2018 22:05:17 +0100 (IST)
Received: from SJCEML701-CHM.china.huawei.com (10.208.112.40) by lhreml704-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.45) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.382.0; Tue, 19 Jun 2018 22:05:20 +0100
Received: from SJCEML521-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.1.141]) by SJCEML701-CHM.china.huawei.com ([169.254.3.24]) with mapi id 14.03.0382.000; Tue, 19 Jun 2018 14:05:13 -0700
From: Leeyoung <leeyoung@huawei.com>
To: Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
CC: "draft-ietf-teas-actn-info-model@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-teas-actn-info-model@ietf.org>, Vishnu Beeram <vbeeram@juniper.net>, "teas-chairs@ietf.org" <teas-chairs@ietf.org>, "teas@ietf.org" <teas@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Alvaro Retana's No Objection on draft-ietf-teas-actn-info-model-09: (with COMMENT)
Thread-Index: AQHUB04+OFGHDPUG5Uq1k192cN0HRaRmnzOpgAF0dCA=
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 21:05:12 +0000
Message-ID: <7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E173D019AB4@sjceml521-mbx.china.huawei.com>
References: <152935855854.2996.11422532201960833892.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> A0664E99-0ABE-4CD2-ADBC-D65B2C1D8495
In-Reply-To: A0664E99-0ABE-4CD2-ADBC-D65B2C1D8495
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.218.137.166]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E173D019AB4sjceml521mbxchi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teas/wmC6gOPoW4GiGQL0A_6QGGr9aGk>
Subject: Re: [Teas] Alvaro Retana's No Objection on draft-ietf-teas-actn-info-model-09: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: teas@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
Precedence: list
List-Id: Traffic Engineering Architecture and Signaling working group discussion list <teas.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/teas>, <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/teas/>
List-Post: <mailto:teas@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas>, <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 21:05:26 -0000

Hi Alvaro,

I forgot when answering we decided not to progress the requirements document as the framework document was more comprehensive. We'll remove the requirements reference.

Thanks.
Young
From: Leeyoung
Sent: Monday, June 18, 2018 5:52 PM
To: Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>;; The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>;
Cc: draft-ietf-teas-actn-info-model@ietf.org; Vishnu Beeram <vbeeram@juniper.net>;; teas-chairs@ietf.org; teas@ietf.org
Subject: RE: Alvaro Retana's No Objection on draft-ietf-teas-actn-info-model-09: (with COMMENT)

Hi Alvaro,

Thanks for your comment. I think that your suggestion to  move the ACTN Requirements from a normative to an  informative reference is reasonable to me.

Best regards,
Young
From:Alvaro Retana
To:The IESG,
Cc:draft-ietf-teas-actn-info-model@ietf.org,Vishnu Beeram,teas-chairs@ietf.org,teas@ietf.org,
Date:2018-06-18 16:49:33
Subject:Alvaro Retana's No Objection on draft-ietf-teas-actn-info-model-09: (with COMMENT)

Alvaro Retana has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-teas-actn-info-model-09: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-teas-actn-info-model/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

This document "covers the requirements identified in"
draft-ietf-teas-actn-requirements, which is used as a Normative reference, but
it looks like it won't be published after all [1].  The framework document
(draft-ietf-teas-actn-framework) does not depend normatively on the
requirements; it seems like it should be possible for this document to not
depend on them either.

[1] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teas/Ep3z1YP2QV8JkgDHK3Zuw0V6Nq0