|
On 01/12/2014 15:48, Thomas D. Nadeau
wrote:
Dean,
See in-line.
Benoit,
You describe the situation really well, but
as next step we have to get more organized and more
coordination in modeling work. We have to make sure that
there is not too much overlap between efforts, not too
waste resources
... and
inconsistencies between data models, which is my primary
concern.
Let's take one
example: policies. I see policies in many YANG models. How
do we make sure the policie definitions are consistent and
extensible? How can we coordinate this (huge) effort? Who
is in charge? The collective responsibility might not be
enough…
Coordination
is only one issue: its operational efficacy that is also of
paramount importance here. We should do what we’ve done in
NETMOD's “design teams”: pair up people that are truly
implementing functionality in real or virtual devices with
operators to ensure that the models created are grounded in
the realities of implementation and deployment.
+1
Regards, Benoit
—Tom
and as well create an architecture
description document, where the relationship between
models will be described. With that we can see which
models can be reused as base model in other models.
Good example of coordination is the
rtg-coord-yang mailing list, but we need one for all
IETF, to be able to find what are other the teams
working on.
Right.
Regards, Benoit
We should not let this momentum go away and
with few simple steps (like improving coordination and
system meta architecture), continue to feed positive
energy into this situation.
|