Subject: DO we really need a session at IETF71?

From: "Bert Wijnen" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:58:07 +0100

Dear WG members,

As you know, we have requested a session slot for IETF71. But
in order for such a session to be usefull, we MUST prepare.

We now have (for more than 10 days already) revision 00 
documents for all of our currently 3 charterd WG work items.
Namely:

	Title		    : NETCONF Monitoring Schema
	Author(s)	    : M. Scott, S. Chisholm
	Filename	    : draft-ietf-netconf-monitoring-00.txt
	Pages		    : 14
	Date		    : 2008-1-15

	Title           : Partial Lock RPC for NETCONF
	Author(s)       : B. Lengyel, M. Bjorklund
	Filename        : draft-ietf-netconf-partial-lock-00.txt
	Pages           : 11
	Date            : 2008-01-07

	Title           : NETCONF over TLS
	Author(s)       : M. Badra
	Filename        : draft-ietf-netconf-tls-00.txt
	Pages           : 9
	Date            : 2008-01-01

Not much commenting and/or discussion has taken place on our
mailing list yet. And that is NOT GOOD. We MUST review and
then comment/discuss these documents on our WG mailing list.

We need to know:

- are enough people reading/reviewing the documents
  in other words, does the WG really care?
- what do people think about the documents.
  don't assume that we as WG chairs will assume that silence
  means consent or agreement. If you like it, pls state so
  with an email to the mailing list that says something aka:
    - I reviewed the document and it is in GOOD SHAPE. 
      Please publish asap.
    - I reviewed (or read) the document and I like it
    - I reviewed (or read) the document and I did not see any
      fatal problems or things that I cannot agree with
- Of course, if you see any open gaps, any problems, or things
  that you think could be done better, then PLEASE POST those
  rather sooner than later. It will help some discussion on
  the mailing list. Hopefully we can solve the issues and
  address the concerns on the list and come to convergence. 
- Those issues that we seem to not be able to find a solution
  for, or for which we do not come to convergence, ONLY THOSE
  deserve serious face to face time at the upcoming IETF meeting.
- We do NOT WANT just presentations or tutorials. We want serious
  discussion of open and/or controversial issues. But we all need
  to prepare for that.

It may sound harsh, but if we do not see any serious discussion
or signs of review on the WG mailing list, then it seems better
to cancel our session at the upconing IETF.

Bert and Mehmet

--
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/>

---

From: Balazs Lengyel <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 16:56:23 +0100

Hello Bert,
We are missing the schema discovery draft. It is not merged into the monitoring draft as I see it.
I have put in comments for the monitoring draft, and have read the TLS one which is OK.
I will shortly publish a 01 version of the partial-locking draft

- I think most/many of the netconf people are putting their energies into the modeling work. So 
please PUSH!!!! for a decision there.

Balazs

-- 
Balazs Lengyel                       Ericsson Hungary Ltd.
TSP System Manager
ECN: 831 7320                        Fax: +36 1 4377792
Tel: +36-1-437-7320     email: [email-masked]

---

From: "Bert Wijnen" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 17:14:50 +0100

Hi Balazs
inline

Bert Wijnen

> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: Balazs Lengyel [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Verzonden: maandag 28 januari 2008 16:56
> Aan: Bert Wijnen
> CC: Netconf
> Onderwerp: Re: DO we really need a session at IETF71?
>
>
> Hello Bert,

Yep I just reviewed quickly and am also not sure if/how it got
merged. So hopefully mark and Sharon can explain what is going on.
We (the WG chairs) had asked for the merged document.

> I have put in comments for the monitoring draft, and have read

Thanks.

> I will shortly publish a 01 version of the partial-locking draft

Great. At the other hand, just publishing it to address my admin/editorial
comments is not needed. What we need is to try and get the WHOLE WG involved
and get theire review. We MUST find out (well before IETF71) if there
are any serious/controverisal issues that we need to discuss f2f.
Once we have more comment, then it is timely enough (in my view) to do
a new revision. But I won;t stop you if you have to cycles to do one
sooner.

> - I think most/many of the netconf people are putting their
>   energies into the modeling work.
>   So please PUSH!!!! for a decision there.
>

That work is also very important, and indeed we need a decision at
the updoming IETF on a direction and a base to work from.

Nevertheless, here in the NETCONF WG, we MUST also try to make progress
and try to meet our milestones that we more or less committed to.
As WG chairs Mehmet and I are responsible to focus (here) on the
NETCONF chartered tasks and to make sure we have a fruitfull session
at IETF71 on the NETCONF chartered WG work items. That is what we
are trying to push for with our somewhat hars message.

Hope you understand.
Bert

---

From: Andy Bierman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 15:23:48 -0800

> Dear WG members,

I have commented on all the pre-WG versions of these drafts.
I may make further comments on the mailing list (if I find
any issues that have not been raised already), but I plan to
read all 3 drafts before the WG meeting.  I think many people
will show up prepared to discuss the drafts, even if they
read them the night before the meeting ;-)

Andy