Re: [OPSAWG] [netmod] Question on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification

> On Feb 7, 2017, at 8:45 PM, Tianran Zhou <zhoutian...@huawei.com> wrote: > > Hi Dean, > > >> -Original Message----- >> From: Dean Bogdanovic [mailto:ivand...@gmail.com] >> Sent: Monday, January 30, 2017 7:53 PM >> To: Tianran Zhou >&g

Re: [OPSAWG] Question on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification

> On Jan 19, 2017, at 4:25 PM, Adrian Farrel wrote: > > Hi, > > We've been trying to ensure that draft-wu-opsawg-service-model-explained is > consistent with the latest version of > draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification. In discussions with Tianran a > question has

Re: [OPSAWG] [netmod] Question on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification

> On Jan 23, 2017, at 9:32 AM, Tianran Zhou wrote: > > To add more comments: > > On the L2SM meeting, several people (4 or more) believed the 3 service > delivery model examples ([I-D.dhjain-bess-bgp-l3vpn-yang], > [I-D.ietf-bess-l2vpn-yang] and

Re: [OPSAWG] [netmod] Question on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification

d on the list). > >> 3. What's the well position of the above terms in the management >> architecture? > > Ah, I like that question. But it makes me ask: where should I look for the > definitive, state-of-the art management architecture? > > Thanks for continuin

Re: [OPSAWG] ADOPTION POLL: A Data Manifest for Contextualized Telemetry Data

Support the adoption of this draft. > Subject: [OPSAWG] ADOPTION POLL: A Data Manifest for Contextualized > Telemetry Data > Date: Mon, 1 May 2023 22:17:48 + > From: Joe Clarke (jclarke) > To: opsawg@ietf.org > > > > This work has been presented a few times now, and