On 10/18/17, 8:35 AM, "netmod on behalf of Eric Voit (evoit)" <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote:
>> From: Juergen Schoenwaelder, October 18, 2017 2:22 AM >> >> On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 11:06:44PM +0000, Eric Voit (evoit) wrote: >> > >> > Section 3.10: There should be a normative set of YANG validation >>tools which >> are run on upload of an Internet draft. Errors and warnings found >>later (and >> perhaps through tools a user doesn't have) should not result in a >>module being >> given an error designation. >> > >> >> I disagree. An error is an error regardless when or how it was detected. > >What I am trying to avoid is YANG errors being discovered via validation >tools for which the model author has no access to before a submitted >draft is accepted. However this can be accomplished is fine with me. > >One solution is to ensure the RFC upload process has access to all tools >currently used for model validation. Right now YANG validation errors and warnings do not block submittal. This good since there are some very annoying false positives in the draft YANG validation. For example, submodule validation is broken even if the module and submodule are in the same draft. Additionally, the status validation spouts out false warnings. I reported the first problem and it was blown off. Thanks, Acee > >Eric > >> /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
