Hi Tianran, With regard to the two action points on the last slide...
1. Add more text to explain the relationship further - Authors need help to understand what is confusing! The authors do not believe that further text is needed, but had heard claims that there is some confusion about the relationship between the two drafts. If no one can explain their confusion, we have no changes to make. I was hopeful that the meeting would expose any confusion. Since it did not, I assume no further work is needed on this point. 2. Leave or remove EVPN that we added - Seemed like a relevant addition - Not in the draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification figure I think Joe's email closes this point. So I think we are good to go. Adrian > -----Original Message----- > From: Tianran Zhou [mailto:zhoutian...@huawei.com] > Sent: 19 July 2017 11:57 > To: adr...@olddog.co.uk; opsawg@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [OPSAWG] Progress with draft-ietf-opsawg-service-model-explained > > Hi Adrian, > > From the last page of the slides, it seem you still have some minor pending > issues, and hope the working group can help. You can bring them to the mailing > list. > > When you think you have dealt with all the pending issues, of course you can ask > for the LC. > > Cheers, > Tianran > > -----Original Message----- > From: OPSAWG [mailto:opsawg-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Farrel > Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2017 4:15 PM > To: opsawg@ietf.org > Subject: [OPSAWG] Progress with draft-ietf-opsawg-service-model-explained > > Hi, > > I was unable to be in OPSAWG on Tuesday because I was chairing I2NSF at that > time. > > Obviously, Qin did a fabulous job presenting the slides. > > Were there any issues or discussions that should be brought to the list? > > Thanks, > Adrian > > _______________________________________________ > OPSAWG mailing list > OPSAWG@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list OPSAWG@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
