All, Lou and I were discussing how it seems unnecessary that every draft has the same boilerplate text regarding how to interpret tree diagram notations. It would be nice if drafts could instead just reference another draft that contains this information. Does this make sense?
Assuming we're interested in having such a reference, we could define a mini-RFC or, perhaps, leverage Section 3 of 6087bis (YANG Tree Diagrams). Either way, we'd want/need to ensure the information is updated in a timely manner. Two reasons for why we may not want to pursue this are: 1) we can’t update the reference fast enough 2) drafts might add some proprietary annotations Is this worth pursuing at all? Thanks, Kent _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
