Hi, RFC 6020, sec. 7.1.5 has this sentence:
Multiple revisions of the same module MUST NOT be imported. I expect the new RFC will contain a complete explanation why this MUST NOT is wrong and needs to be changed. I would expect that multiple implementation examples of this approach can be cited, as proof that the new solution already works (before it is standardized). Andy On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 2:59 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > after long discussions in physical meetings, virtual meetings, and on > the mailing list, I believe we have reached rough consensus to adopt > Y45-04 in order to resolve import ambiguities (aka typedef drift and > grouping drift) and we will leave it to YANG extensions (to be worked > on in the future) to provide means to define explicit conformance > requirements (instead of trying to derive conformance requirements > from import relationships alone). A recent poll of core contributors > on this issue can be found here: > > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netmod/current/msg12560.html > > Please speak up by Monday 2015-05-25 if you disagree with this > proposal and your position is not yet included in the email message > pointed to above. > > For more details, see the issues list available here: > > http://svn.tools.ietf.org/svn/wg/netmod/yang-1.1/ > > /js > > -- > Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH > Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany > Fax: +49 421 200 3103 <http://www.jacobs-university.de/> > > _______________________________________________ > netmod mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
