Tom,

Inline…

On 3/16/17, 10:04 AM, "t.petch" <[email protected]> wrote:

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Clyde Wildes (cwildes)" <[email protected]>
    Sent: Monday, March 13, 2017 6:11 PM
    
    > Tom,
    >
    > The next revision of the draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model includes a
    change to the Yang tree diagram explanation to include the text from
    RFC6087bis.
    >
    > RFC5426 is referenced in the model where "Transmission of Syslog
    Messages over UDP” occurs:
    >
    >               case udp {
    >                  container udp {
    >                    description
    >                      "This container describes the UDP transport
    >                       options.";
    >                    reference
    >                      "RFC 5426: Transmission of Syslog Messages over
    UDP";
    >
    > This is a correct reference.
    
    Indeed but I don't think that [RFC5426]  is going to work as part of
    leaf sig-number-resends
    while
    
           leaf structured-data {
            ...
           as per RFC5424
    
    is not the usual style.
    
[clyde] I was urged to use the descriptions directly from RFC5848 – in this 
case from section 6.1.2. Configuration Parameters for Signature Blocks (page 25)

    sigNumberResends = number of times a Signature Block is resent.
      (It is recommended to select a value of greater than "0" in
      particular when the UDP transport [RFC5426] is used.)    

[clyde] Please suggest a new name for the selector that you think should be 
changed. I could not find a reference to this in my notes.

    On another tack, I thought that you agreed to change one of the
    identifiers in
    
         grouping selector {
           description
    
           container selector {
    
Thanks,

Clyde 

   
    Tom Petch
    
    > Thanks,
    >
    > Clyde
    >
    > On 3/1/17, 4:20 AM, "netmod on behalf of t.petch"
    <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >     The explanation of the YANG tree diagram is not that in RFC6087; I
    think
    >     that it should be (or else explain why not)
    >
    >     I am confused by the variation in the references to RFC in the
    modules.
    >
    >     I see
    >     RFC 5424
    >     [RFC5426]
    >     RFC5424
    >
    >     I think the first correct
    >
    >     Tom Petch
    >
    >     ----- Original Message -----
    >     From: "Alexander Clemm" <[email protected]>
    >     To: "Kent Watsen" <[email protected]>;
    >     <[email protected]>
    >     Cc: <[email protected]>
    >     Sent: Friday, February 24, 2017 12:25 AM
    >     Subject: Re: [netmod] WG Last Call for
    draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model-11
    >
    >     _______________________________________________
    >     netmod mailing list
    >     [email protected]
    >     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
    >
    >
    >
    
    

_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

Reply via email to