>>Does this mean you're okay reposting your ID similar to Martin's?
>>I ask as a chair interested in starting the adoption process on
>>these nmda-update drafts.
>
> I would hope this is not a prerequisite? We are evaluating how bad this
> will be. I’d ask how many implementations there are of ietf-routing?

Yes, please provide this info when you have it.


>>> However, what about secondary and tertiary implications of moving to
>>> NDMA? If we change a path from “interface-state-ref” to “interface-ref”
>>> to reference an interface, I’d hope no one would expect the old
>>> statement to be kept around…
>>
>>But the old statement would be kept around, in its deprecated form.
>>Of course, the nmda-guidelines should cause those downstream modules
>>to be updated to NMDA as well, so hopefully just a short-lived issue.
>
> This could be really ugly and cascade if we are just using a different
> path for a reference. Hopefully, all the old references are in deprecated
> trees. Otherwise, I guess the new data leaf would need a unique name.

Indeed.  Let's see what the analysis reveals.

Kent



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

Reply via email to