[adding my successor Dan Romascanu]
Phil,
can you for now just give me all the required changes in
the form of
-- page xx
OLD:
old text
NEW:
new text or additional text.
So that for now I can do them as a "Note to RFC-Editor".
If we end up with too many I may ask for another rev, but
if it is containable, then a note-to-rfc-ed may be fastest.
Thanks,
Bert
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Phil Shafer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 21:42
> To: Joel M. Halpern
> Cc: Rob Enns; Mary Barnes; [email protected]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Simon
> Leinen; Andy Bierman
> Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Assignment: draft-ietf-netconf-prot-11.txt
>
>
> "Joel M. Halpern" writes:
> >Firstly, the text refers to "the <url> element can appear as the
> ><config> parameter..." As such, there appears to be a requirement
> >that whatever the data model defines <config> to be, it must be
> >allowed to have a URL as its contents. Can we say this
> somehow in 7.2?
>
> I think this is a bug. The contents of the <config> element
> are data-model specific, so an <url> element would conflict
> with this idea, and disturb the opaqueness of the <config>
> element. The <url> is the <source> and <target> elements
> of other RPCs works well, but <url> inside <config> seems
> like a conflict.
>
> >Secondly, the examples all seem to assume an outer <top> element in
> >the config. I can not actually tell if this is required. If it is,
> >should we say something about that in 7.2?
>
> <top> is just an example top-level element for a fictional
> data model. We should explicitly state this.
>
> Thanks,
> Phil
>
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
