Re: WG Review: NETCONF Data Modeling Language (netmod)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



I echo Tom Petch’s concern.  

 

Given the level of deployment success of new IETF management efforts

for the last 5-10 years, I’d suggest that we need both customer

“pull” as well as technical community “push” for such an effort

to succeed.  While there have been arguments made for the latter,

I don’t see enough evidence of customer (in particular, operator)

involvement to feel confident that the former has been addressed.

 

 

 

David Harrington said:

 

“The people who believe that YANG is more expressive and better suited

for this poarticular purpose include contributors to the design of

SMIv2, MIB Doctors, members of the NMRG who helped develop the SMING

information and data modeling language,  contributors to the SMIng WG

which worked on developing a proposed SMIv3 to converge the SMIv2

standard and the SPPI data modeling language standard and the NMRG

SMING approach, and engineers who have multiple independent

implementations of running code for Netconf data modeling.”

 

Tom Petch said:

 

“Sounds magnificent but who are these people and where are they?

 

I do track the YANG and NGO mailing lists and what I see there worries me.  I

see a significant number of questions along the lines; of what does this mean,

how can this ever work, how can I do ... and the questions are all very

reasonable and need answers - which they mostly get, even if they are somewhat

too often along the lines of 'oh dear', or 'more work needed'.

 

But they are the sort of questions I, for all I have done with SMI, ASN.1 and

other languages, would not have thought to ask; they come from someone at the

sharp end writing code for today's boxes.  Yet these questions are almost all

coming from just one person with a specific market place, and if he can find so

many doubts and queries, how many more are there waiting to be discovered?

 

That one person - hi, Andy! - is doing a magnificent job but for a new language

to live up to its billing, we need half a dozen such people, from different

parts of O&M to find the holes; and I just do not see them, at least not on the

YANG and NGO mailing lists.

 

The answers, likewise, mostly come from the same three or so people; again, I am

concerned that there are not more, given the claims of yang.

 

This causes me to doubt that we, the IETF, really has the community of interest

to undertake such a challenging assignment.

 

Tom Petch”

_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]