Roman: May I ask a questions before answering your questions.
1) How many security Yang models have been published? 2) How long does it take Yang models approved in the security area? 3) How many IETF yang models have been deployed? 4) Does the small deployment for IETF yang models change the value of the model? The SEC-ADs sent this WG off to create Yang models. Did you consider this in your review? May I politely and respectfully suggest there are things about the standardizing Yang models that you have not asked about. The first stage of a yang model is joyous. You decide what goes in. The second of getting a prototype yang model implementation is hard work. The third stage of getting the model approved in the IETF environment is frustrating and painful. During the second and third stage, most WGs have trouble keeping up the energy - since it is all about the small details of Yang. Tom Petch has been very helpful, but it is a long process to refactored structures in Yang. Paul has done a tremendous job in both doing prototype implementations, and working through the lengthy issues with the Yang models. While completing those 5 models, Paul has run into many of the structural issues/debates inside Yang. Having struggle to incorporate yang models from IP-SEC into the BGP model (with my excellent co-authors), may I suggest that even the IP-SEC models are just at the beginning from I2NSF. Maybe there are other IP-SEC Yang models outside of I2NSF. Sue -----Original Message----- From: I2nsf [mailto:i2nsf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Roman Danyliw Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2022 2:33 PM To: i2nsf@ietf.org Subject: [I2nsf] Comments on re-chartering Hi! It's nice to see I2NSF on the formal meeting agenda again. I see discussions on the mailing list to again revisit the WG charter [3] and it's on the agenda for this week's IETF 113 meeting. I don't want my position at the meeting to come as a surprise so I'll restate what I've previously said in November 2020 [1] and October 2021 [2] on a new I2NSF charter: ** By all means, please use the WG to discuss I2NSF and the associated ecosystem. ** With the degree of discussion and review demonstrated in the last two years by the WG on I2NSF documents, these is not sufficient WG participation to take on new work. It remains unclear if there is even enough energy to finish the currently charted documents. Given the current WG dynamics, I will not support a new charter. ** Rechartering the WG would first require all previously promised deliverables (all 5 YANG modules) to be complete (at the RFC Editor), and then amongst other things, the identification of a critical mass of additional WG participants (beyond document authors/their organizations) committed to reviewing and implementing the work. Next steps would be heavily dependent on the specifics of the new work being proposed. To the specific charter text [3], a few high level questions: (a) This seems like a lot of work that equal to, if not larger than, the original WG scope which the WG is having difficulty finishing. Given that I2NSF has been unable to publish any of its core protocol deliverables in the last 6.5 years (chartered September 2015), is this the right size of new work to consider? Why is there bandwidth to do new work, but not finish the existing work? (b) This seems like a significant expansion into areas that I2NSF has not worked on -- DLT, PQ Crypto, attestation, etc. This begs questions such as whether a new WG is more appropriate. Why is I2NSF the right place? (c) Correct me if I'm wrong, it's my understanding that there isn't commercial adoption (or a substantial user base) of I2NSF yet. If that's true, what role will this new work play in increasing the likelihood of adoption? Why does this additional work have to happen now rather than waiting for more operational experience? Regards, Roman [1] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/i2nsf/FBzpXwPUaY5PkcgvKpWnHAAanp4/ [2] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/i2nsf/GAqtySDhTlhgPGMh_MdaajApUDs/ [3] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/i2nsf/XQxOoQS9JkJ0hDeICISHEl8QasE/ _______________________________________________ I2nsf mailing list I2nsf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf _______________________________________________ I2nsf mailing list I2nsf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf
