Jürgen,
On Wed, Sep 09, 2015 at 08:38:35PM -0400, Nadeau Thomas wrote:
I wanted to set things up for the interim meeting tomorrow. To frame
the meeting, we want to achieve two main goals:
1) close on requirements around a requirement to define a structure for
IETF models and the requirements around ops state/models
I am confused. Benoit pointed to section 4 which has essentially
requirements concerning the support of asynchronous systems. You seem
to be talking also about requirements that go beyond that. It would be
good to know well ahead of time what is exactly on the agenda.
I also mentioned: "or around the requirement that the YANG models need
some sort of hierarchy (draft-openconfig-netmod-model-structure), like
for the routing models, ..."
If the group acknowledges that there is a requirement to structure all
YANG models, basically extending what's done for the routing models,
that would already be an achievement.
I would like to verify whether my understanding is correct: there is a
willingness to structure the YANG models at least per technology
(routing, OAM, for example), and we're debating whether or not "/device"
is appropriate. This "/device" is a minor point IMO.
Regards, Benoit
/js
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
