Subject: Re: [L3sm] Poll for adoption of draft-ltsd-l3sm-l3vpn-service-model

From: "Dacheng Zhang" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 17:05:38 +0800

Hi, 

I just got a chance to read the draft with a big interest. I think this work
is ready for adoption as a WG draft.

Cheers

Dacheng

发件人: L3sm [mailto:[email-masked]] 代表 Qin Wu
发送时间: 2015年6月16日 21:39
收件人: [email-masked]
抄送: [email-masked]
主题: [L3sm] Poll for adoption of draft-ltsd-l3sm-l3vpn-service-model

Hello working group:

As you'll recall, our charter directs us to produce a single deliverable: a
YANG data model that describes a L3VPN service.

The charter says:

> The working group should consider draft-l3vpn-service-yang as a

> starting point.

The authors of that draft have just reposted it as
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ltsd-l3sm-l3vpn-service-model giving
it a name that associates it with the working group, and picking up a number
of review comments from the mailing list.

Obviously the document is not perfect yet, but the chairs believe it is
sufficiently stable that we should adopt it into the WG so that we can
polish it and work towards publication as an RFC. So this email starts a
two-week poll for adoption of the draft ending 30/06/2015.

Please indicate whether you support adoption for not, and if not why. If you
support adoption, have you read the document? do you think it meets our
needs? is it stable enough for adoption? If you oppose to adoption, can you
say why? what is your proposed alternative? what needs to be done before
adoption?

It's likely that as you review the document you will come up with issues and
concerns. We hope these will be fixed along the way, so please do raise them
on the mailing list. But please also try to understand the difference
between a critical issue that should block adoption, and smaller issues that
can be fixed better through discussion within the working group.

Thanks,

Qin and Adrian