Hi Alex, all,
Thanks for your detailed clarification. I think your suggestion makes a lot of
sense to me. An independent NE location model can be extended for various
outdoor and indoor scenarios, and the separate network inventory model can
apply to more general network scenarios.
Thanks,
Bo
Hi Tianran,
I think this is a timely piece of work that should be adopted. I commit
to further reviews if it is adopted.
A few minor comments on this version, below. Nothing that needs to be
fixed before adoption.
There is a meta-question: should the schedule model be moved out into
Hello Bo, all,
to your question: With the two inventory models, I was referring to the
two models in the two drafts as per the poll, i.e.:
(1) draft-ietf-ccamp-network-inventory-yang-02
(ietf-network-hardware-inventory)
(2) draft-wzwb-opsawg-network-inventory-management-03
(ietf-network-
Hi Alex, all,
It seems to me you mentioned two IVY models, one is the BASE inventory model
with minimum inventory attributes, and the other seems to be the CORE inventory
model, which is the major requirements as charter B. Hardware/Software
components including licenses. Am I correct?
In addi
+1
I agree with Jeff, Dieter, and Gabriele.
My preference is option 1 to adopt draft-ietf-ccamp-network-inventory-yang-02
in IVY and evolve it to become the network inventory base model.
This draft already addresses the main requirement operators highlighted since
the beginning of the inventory w
