fantastic!
> On Jul 6, 2015, at 4:14 PM, Anees Shaikh wrote:
>
> We've posted a new version of our draft:
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-openconfig-netmod-opstate-01
>
> It includes a section on the issues that were raised and our
> observation/comment. It also adds a detailed section
thats a good start. lets please discuss the merits and pros/cons vs the open
cconfig proposal.
> On Jul 6, 2015, at 3:59 PM, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Nadeau Thomas wrote:
>>
>>One of the actions from the last Interim meeting was to have both
>>sides of the issues around
We've posted a new version of our draft:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-openconfig-netmod-opstate-01
It includes a section on the issues that were raised and our
observation/comment. It also adds a detailed section on terminology based
on the interim calls, and updates the operational requirem
Hi,
Nadeau Thomas wrote:
>
> One of the actions from the last Interim meeting was to have both
> sides of the issues around the open config approach to create at least
> slides/textual bullet points for use during our discussion in Praha so
> we can come to a conclusion a
One of the actions from the last Interim meeting was to have both sides
of the issues around the open config approach to create at least slides/textual
bullet points for use during our discussion in Praha so we can come to a
conclusion around the final issues. We need these slides/bull
