Subject: [Netmod-ver-dt] Netmod Ver DT - Meeting Agenda 14th June

From: Robert Wilton <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 14:30:57 +0100

Hi,

My proposed agenda for today's meeting is below, please reply with any 
proposed changes/additions.

1) Agenda bashing (if required) (5 mins)
- Is it feasible to preliminary Problem Statement and Requirements 
published as a design team ID before IETF 102?

2) Status of last weeks actions (5 mins)

3) Discussion of open issues: (45 mins)

(i) If Juergen is present, then discussion on whether a namespace triple 
is really required might be useful.

(ii) Can be progress the Problem Definition text

(iii) Discussion on requirements.

4) Wrap up, actions before next meeting (5 mins)

------------

Webex details:

https://cisco.webex.com/ciscosales/j.php?MTID=m196086ddc16716f4da6338e481c01246 

Meeting number (access code): 200 574 017
Meeting password: UdTbwvpT (83829878 from phones)

JOIN BY PHONE
+1-866-432-9903 Call-in toll-free number (US/Canada)
+1-408-525-6800 Call-in toll number (US/Canada)

Global call-in numbers: 
https://cisco.webex.com/ciscosales/globalcallin.php?serviceType=MC&ED=435913767&tollFree=1 

Toll-free dialing restrictions: 
https://www.webex.com/pdf/tollfree_restrictions.pdf

Thanks,
Rob

---

From: Robert Wilton <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 17:03:48 +0100

Brief meeting minutes:

- We discussed Juergen's text on YANG versioning (existing vs what is 
changing).  Still converging.
- We all agreed that we are aiming for a solution that allows modules to 
be updated in a non backwards compatible way without changing the module 
name/namespace/path.
- We agreed to pull out the early sections of the clacla draft into a 
separate requirements draft, with an aim to publish an early version 
before IETF 102, so that the WG can provide feedback on our direction if 
required.
- We discussed the requirements list that I sent out prior to the 
meeting. They seemed to be broadly along the right lines, and hence we 
can probably use these as a starting point, but request further review 
and discussion on the DT alias.

Actions:
  - Rob to setup a netmod-wg github repository (I don't have 
permissions, so have deferred this to the chairs).
  - Joe to push initial version to the github repository so that we can 
review/edit.
  - Everyone review/comment/refine the requirements text that I sent out.
  - Once the initial draft is available in github then we should all 
work on trying to get this text into good shape for IETF 102.

Please feel free to correct any mistakes/omissions/etc.

Thanks,
Rob

On 14/06/2018 14:30, Robert Wilton wrote:
> (i) If Juergen is present, then discussion on whether a namespace 
> triple is really required might be useful.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Netmod-ver-dt mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod-ver-dt
> .
>