Re: [Netconf] New draft-ietf-netconf-partial-lock-08.txt goes to AD andIETF Last Call

["Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca at avaya.com>]

I would like to make progress on this issue and forward the document to
IETF Last Call. My reading from the discussions on the list supports the
chairs opinion about consensus, but also shows that at least one strong
and articulated different opinion exists. This is not reflected in the
current PROTO write-up, so I would like to ask Bert to mention the
minority concerns in section (1e) of the write-up (How solid is the WG
consensus behind this document?). 

DBH and other - please feel free to re-iterate your concerns as IETF LC
comments. 

Dan


> -----Original Message-----
> From: netconf-bounces at ietf.org 
> [mailto:netconf-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf Of Balazs Lengyel
> Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2009 10:41 AM
> To: Andy Bierman
> Cc: netconf at ietf.org; 'Ron Bonica'
> Subject: Re: [Netconf] New 
> draft-ietf-netconf-partial-lock-08.txt goes to AD andIETF Last Call
> 
> Andy Bierman wrote:
> > As I have stated before, I strongly object to changing the NETCONF 
> > database architecture without a complete re-charter and 
> development of 
> > a NETCONF Architecture document first -- one that does not ignore 
> > access control.
> > 
> 
> I agree with Andy, that introducing multiple candidate 
> configs or a partial-commit operation is out of scope for 
> now, and requires careful consideration and a recharter.
> Balazs
> _______________________________________________
> Netconf mailing list
> Netconf at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf
>