On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 4:07 AM, Nadeau Thomas <tnad...@lucidvision.com> wrote:
> > As you know, after much discussion, the Co-chairs declared these > requirements to be in scope and > having consensus to proceed forward at one of the recent interim meetings, > and on the mailing list to confirm. > > I did not say any of the requirements are not in scope. Apparently what is not in scope is any concept of an Applicability Statement for this problem and its solution(s). > —Tom > Andy > > > On Dec 16, 2015:7:21 PM, at 7:21 PM, Andy Bierman <a...@yumaworks.com> > wrote: > > Hi, > > I have asked repeatedly for some indication of scope in these requirements. > There is an assumption all possible YANG-based platforms have intended > and applied state that can be different for a long enough interval such > that retrieving > the differences is operationally useful. > > For devices that converge in milli-seconds or even as long as 5 seconds, > I do not see the point of implementing solutions for these requirements. > I would prefer that this draft specify some sort of objective > metric for determining the solution applicability. > > > Andy > > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Nadeau Thomas <tnad...@lucidvision.com> > wrote: > >> >> This is a WG Last Call on draft-ietf-netmod-opstate-reqs-01. >> Please post comments on this draft by Wednesday, December 30, 2015 >> at 9AM EST. >> >> Tom/Kent >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> netmod mailing list >> netmod@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod >> > > >
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
