Suresh: The NETCONF and NETMOD groups have asked the I2RS to specify the requirements, and not the specific solutions. We have done implementations based on NETCONF/RESTCONF that solve these issues, and described the mechanisms. However, the NETCONF and NETMOD groups have asked us only to provide requirements. All the solutions must be discussed in the NETCONF/NETMOD working groups.
Sue -----Original Message----- From: i2rs [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Suresh Krishnan Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2016 3:03 AM To: The IESG Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: [i2rs] Suresh Krishnan's No Objection on draft-ietf-i2rs-ephemeral-state-19: (with COMMENT) Suresh Krishnan has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-i2rs-ephemeral-state-19: 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-i2rs-ephemeral-state/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I am surprised to see MUST level requirements on YANG "Ephemeral-REQ-06: YANG MUST have the ability to do the following:" and further requirements on NETCONF (REQ-09) and RESTCONF (REQ-10) in this document. Are there associated drafts in the respective WGs to make sure these requirements are met? _______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs _______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
