Great thank you for update and approved for all below

Grzegorz Piotr Orchel executive director GGO Trust

On Mon, 13 Jul 2026 at 15:04, Sarah Tarrant via auth48archive <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Vladimir,
>
> Noted! We'll move this to the formatting stage.
>
> Thank you,
> Sarah Tarrant
> RFC Production Center
>
> > On Jul 12, 2026, at 3:04 PM, Vladimir Vassilev <
> [email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > On 7/10/26 10:15 PM, Sarah Tarrant wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Vladimir,
> >>
> >> No need for a new version -- we're happy to update the files on our
> end, with your permission.
> >>
> >> A more recent sourcecode type="xml" example can be found in Section
> 2.1.1.3.2 of RFC 9684 (see the xml source).
> >>
> >> As for the elements in Section 2.4, 2.5, 3, and 4, may we update those
> to sourcecode type="yang"?
> >
> >
> > OK. Seems RFC9684 XML  uses <sourcecode type="yangtree"> which is
> relevant for the 2.4 and 2.5 sections.
> >
> > /V
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Thank you,
> >> Sarah Tarrant
> >> RFC Production Center
> >>
> >>> On Jul 10, 2026, at 5:05 AM, Vladimir Vassilev <
> [email protected]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi Sarah,
> >>>
> >>> On 7/9/26 4:54 PM, Sarah Tarrant wrote:
> >>>> Hi Vladimir,
> >>>>
> >>>> What appears in A.4 would typically be marked as <sourcecode
> type=“xml”>.  Also, what appears in Sections 2.4, 2.5, 3, and 4 would
> typically be marked as <sourcecode type=“yang”>.  Marking them as such
> allows users/readers to easily extract the sourcecode from the RFC(s).
> Please note that Section 3.12 of RFC 9907 seems to recommend marking
> examples as code.
> >>>>
> >>>> Please review and let us know if you have strong objections.
> >>> Do you want me to make -18 version with these changes? I can use
> <sourcecode type="pseudocode"> for the examples.
> >>>
> >>> As for the YANG modules and the XML serialization I have no objections
> if this is the latest recommendation. As noted RFC7223 was used as template
> and the current version is consistent with
> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-netmod-rfc7223bis-03.xml where
> only <artwork><![CDATA[ was used for YANG modules and XML serialization. By
> the way rfcstrip correctly detects the YANG modules and extracts them from
> -17
> >>>
> >>> Is there a more recent RFC that is consistent with your recommendation
> just so we can use it instead?
> >>>
> >>> /V
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Thank you,
> >>>> Sarah Tarrant
> >>>> RFC Production Center
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Jul 9, 2026, at 1:12 AM, Vladimir Vassilev <
> [email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi Sarah,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> A.1, A.2, A.3 are the pseudocode examples.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> A.4 is XML. But you should not change that to <sourcecode> since it
> is not source. Seems the other drafts/RFCs we used for template/reference
> specifying YANG data model defined NETCONF PDUs also use
> "<artwork><![CDATA[" for that.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> /V
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 7/8/26 7:21 PM, Sarah Tarrant wrote:
> >>>>>> Hi Vladimir,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thank you for your reply!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Regarding the pseudocode, the XML files shows all code elements
> inside <sourcecode> tags, so it is difficult to determine which ones
> (besides the obvious artwork elements) are yang, xml, or pseudocode. Could
> you further clarify which type should be set for each of the following
> sourcecode elements? (I've included the section number and the first line
> to help.)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Section 2.4: module: ietf-traffic-generator
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Section 2.5: module: ietf-traffic-analyzer
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Section 3: module ietf-traffic-generator
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Section 4: module ietf-traffic-analyzer
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Section A.1: # Connect to network
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Section A.2: net.node("tester1").edit(
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Section A.3: net.node("tester1").edit(
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Section A.4: <rpc-reply
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Sincerely,
> >>>>>> Sarah Tarrant
> >>>>>> RFC Production Center
>
> --
> auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>
-- 
auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to