On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 07:18:42PM +0200, Vladimir Vassilev wrote: > On 08/20/2016 10:29 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > > > > As document shepherd, I believe there is no strong agreement on the > > problem and there is no concrete proposal with strong consensus for a > > modification of the document (which is in AUTH48). In fact, there has > > been no defect description and proposed bug fix at all on the NETMOD > > mailing list. > Hello, > > I have strong objection to the text proposed as solution to issue #41: >
Dear Vladimir Vassilev, please note that we YANG 1.1 is in AUTH48 state, that is YANG 1.1 has passed WG last call, IETF last call, and IESG approval. In other words, we are way beyond the state in the IETF process where we discuss the resolution of individual issues. As far as I recall from the logs, issue #41 was closed about two years ago. /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
