Hi Michael,
I am sorry for missing that mail.
Now we have IOTOPS for more bandwidth to discussion on MUD.
I think it would be a good idea to collect more interest in IOTOPS, and bring
to OPSAWG.
Tianran
-Original Message-
From: OPSAWG [mailto:opsawg-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
Title: LS/o on initiation a new work item ITU-T Y.IMT2020-IBNMO “Intent-based
network management and orchestration for network slicing in IMT-2020 and beyond”
Submission Date: 2021-03-16
URL of the IETF Web page: https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/1724/
From: Yushuang HU
To: Henk Birkholz
I think it would benefit from opsawg review, and that a standard is appropriate
in this instance.
Eliot
> On 16 Mar 2021, at 21:16, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> Signed PGP part
>
> Tianran Zhou wrote:
>> IMO, whether to apply ISE or WG adoption depends on the authors themselves.
>> If I
Tianran Zhou wrote:
> IMO, whether to apply ISE or WG adoption depends on the authors
themselves.
> If I recall right, we did not get the adoption request from the
> authors.
I actually did post back in 2020
And, of course, I pasted the fully-qualified link with revision. The DT
link is https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-110-opsawg/.
Joe
On 3/16/21 09:02, Joe Clarke (jclarke) wrote:
> On 3/16/21 07:56, tom petch wrote:
>> From: OPSAWG on behalf of Tianran Zhou
>>
>> Sent: 15 March 2021
On 3/16/21 06:13, tom petch wrote:
> Some editorial quirks
>
> YANG
> revision reference
> the text value is not quite the same as the title of the I-D; perhaps both
> are not quite right
Good catch. These two should be normalized. Perhaps the better title
is YANG module for TACACS+.
>
>
On 3/16/21 07:56, tom petch wrote:
> From: OPSAWG on behalf of Tianran Zhou
>
> Sent: 15 March 2021 01:21
>
> Hi WG,
>
> Thanks very much for your attending the OPSAWG on line meeting.
> The initial meeting minutes is now online:
> https://codimd.ietf.org/notes-ietf-110-opsawg
>
>
> That URL
From: OPSAWG on behalf of Tianran Zhou
Sent: 15 March 2021 01:21
Hi WG,
Thanks very much for your attending the OPSAWG on line meeting.
The initial meeting minutes is now online:
https://codimd.ietf.org/notes-ietf-110-opsawg
That URL gives me a blank page. The datatracker gives me HTML.
Thanks Tianran,
In my opinion, work that is in scope for an existing working group must
first be offered to that working group. If the working group has no
interest in pursuing it, that is OK and it can be brought to the
Independent Stream provided it does not conflict with ongoing work in the
Some editorial quirks
YANG
revision reference
the text value is not quite the same as the title of the I-D; perhaps both are
not quite right
leaf shared-secret
/shared keys/shared secrets/
should we recommend improving the entropy with mixed case, digits, punctuation?
I note that the
Hi Adrian,
IMO, whether to apply ISE or WG adoption depends on the authors themselves.
If I recall right, we did not get the adoption request from the authors.
We welcome MUD related work, and we will consider from many aspects, like:
1. any conflict to existing solution
2. wg interests
...
But
11 matches
Mail list logo
