Hi Chris, I support adoption.
But I found the use of "version 1" in the title a bit weird. Every time we add new features, we would have to name the I-Ds as version 2,3..; IMHO it would be distracting. Should we just name the features instead, something like - "IS-IS YANG Model Augmentations for Minimum Remaining Lifetime and Application-Specific Link Attributes"? Also, for Application-Specific Link Attributes, it would be a good idea to state clearly that this YANG model is state-only and configurations are likely to be part of some application-specific YANG models perhaps? Thanks! Dhruv On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 6:43 PM Christian Hopps <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Folks, so far we've received only a single feedback on adopting this > document, can we get a few more responses form the WG? > > Thanks, > Chris. > > > On Jan 5, 2021, at 4:19 AM, Christian Hopps <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Signed PGP part > > This begins a 2 week WG adoption call for the following draft: > > > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-acee-lsr-isis-yang-augmentation-v1/ > > > > Please indicate your support or objection by January 19th, 2021. > > > > Authors, please respond to the list indicating whether you are aware of any > > IPR that applies to this draft. > > > > Thanks, > > Chris. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Lsr mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr _______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
