Benoit, Okay - we'll add the intended status to the milestones.
Lou On 3/20/2017 7:09 AM, Benoit Claise wrote: > Lou, > > In all my WGs, we consistently documented the intended status in the > milestones, expressing the _intended _status at the time of the > charter discussion > > Regards, Benoit >> Juergen, >> >> Thank you for the input. I think your point highlights how the >> technical contents of a document drives the intended status of a >> document. >> >> Lou >> >> PS as a reminder to all, intended status of documents is *not* >> typically included in charters and are not included in the >> distributed version. >> >> >> >> >> On March 16, 2017 2:44:53 AM Juergen Schoenwaelder >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 02:50:06PM +0100, Mehmet Ersue wrote: >>> >>>> That said different people including Netconf WG co-chairs think the DS >>>> concept document is Informational in nature and should be published >>>> as an >>>> Informational concept to be used in and adopted for the needs in >>>> diverse >>>> protocol WGs. This is as I think also important to avoid an >>>> overlapping >>>> between NETCONF and NETMOD charters. >>> >>> The current datastore draft includes concrete YANG idenity definitions >>> for datastores and origins and these definitions better be standards >>> track. >>> >>> /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
