Hi Joe, I support adoption.
I have an interest in this work from co-chairing L3SM and L2SM, and I have been attending some of the virtual meetings although I haven't made great contributions to the work. It seems to me that this work falls in scope alongside L3NM and I think it is similarly necessary to construct a top-to-bottom YANG-based management system for L2VPN services. The discussion of breaking out common components into a separate module, possibly in a separate document, is worth having. It appears that some implementations struggle with imports of named elements rather than whole modules. Rather than argue about how to correctly handle imports, it seems to make sense to structure our modules to be as useful as possible. Best, Adrian -----Original Message----- From: OPSAWG <opsawg-boun...@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Joe Clarke (jclarke) Sent: 16 June 2020 15:18 To: opsawg <opsawg@ietf.org> Subject: [OPSAWG] CALL FOR ADOPTION: draft-barguil-opsawg-l2sm-l2nm Hello, opsawg. I hope everyone is doing well. This starts a two-week poll for adoption of the L2 network module document. There does seem to be interest in this work, and it is progressing nicely in GitHub with side meetings. There appears to be questions on what will be broken out into commonality between this module and the L3NM (work which is also underway). So while we anticipate changes to this draft, the chairs think it’s reached a point where we’d like to see if the WG wants to formally adopt the work. Please reply on-list with your comments on the draft and whether or not you support its WG adoption. We will conclude this call on June 30, 2020. Thanks. Joe _______________________________________________ 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
