Hi, "Bogaert, Bart (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)" <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello, > > The latest draft does not contain an appendix with the deprecated state tree
Nothing has been deprecated since this will be the first published version of this module. > (to support the non-NMDA model as specified in RFC6087bis section 4.23.3), This would be a "New module". > so if it is published in this way, there is an issue at the level of BBF > TR-383. Can you elaborate on this? 6087bis says that we MAY include a temporay non-NMDA version (i.e., a module with just /hardware-state), but it would be a different module name (ietf-hardware-state) and a different XML namespace. > Note that the draft-ietfnetmod-rfc7223bis does include the deprecated > container interfaces-state. Yes, since ietf-interface has already been published. /martin > > Best regards, > Bart Bogaert > > -----Original Message----- > From: netmod [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Lou Berger > Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2017 6:36 PM > To: NetMod WG <[email protected]> > Cc: NetMod WG Chairs <[email protected]> > Subject: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-entity-05 > > All, > > This starts a two-week working group last call on > draft-ietf-netmod-entity-05. > > The working group last call ends on December 13. > Please send your comments to the netmod mailing list. > > Positive comments, e.g., "I've reviewed this document and believe it is > ready for publication", are welcome! > This is useful and important, even from authors. > > Thank you, > Netmod Chairs > > _______________________________________________ > netmod mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
