Subject: Notification draft data models

From: Andy Bierman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 04 Nov 2006 10:20:30 -0800

Hi,

IMO, the WG as a whole has a fair understanding of XSD,
but the sections in the draft that define data models seem
very difficult to understand.  In RFCs that contain MIB modules,
there is a great deal of text to explain what is contained
in the data model, why it is useful, how the parts relate
to each other, usage examples -- you know -- documentation.

I think the same documentation quality we expect for SMIv2
should apply to an RFC containing XSDs.

The same consensus process that we use for MIB standardization
should also apply to NETCONF:

1) Agree on the problem
2) Agree on the solution approach
3) Agree on the data model structure
4) Agree on each individual data element
5) Agree on the conformance requirements

I'm not sure we are past step (1) with some of the data models
in the draft.  I think it would help if the authors provided
some use cases and examples for all the data models, to help
the WG discuss the details at the meeting on Monday.

thanks,
Andy

--
to unsubscribe send a message to [email-masked] with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/netconf/>