Hi Acee, "Acee Lindem (acee)" <[email protected]> writes:
> Hi Lou, et al, > > The only issue we are struggling with is whether we need to specify the > version in the ietf-interfaces import. We have noted that > draft-ietf-netmod-rfc7277bis-01.txt does not import by revision. I would suggest to import *without* revision but add a description indicating that the NMDA-compatible revisions are needed. Importing by revision is clearly suboptimal. Hopefully a new mechanism such as semantic versioning will be introduced soon to alleviate this issue. > > We also have so nits: > > 1. Add an informative reference for > [I-D.ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams]. > 2. Based on a comment from Vladimir, we added the prefix for > ietf-routing.yang, “rt:”, to several references within ietf-routing.yang. > Was this necessary? Of course, the model compiles with or without the > prefix. RFC6087bis has some rules in sec. 4.2, and these should be followed. Also, the security considerations should IMO be changed, see my recent message: https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netmod/current/msg19610.html Of course, the NEW formulation needn't be exactly as I suggested, but the text "The YANG module [...] is designed to be accessed ..." is apparently wrong and shouldn't be used any more. Thanks, Lada > > Thanks, > Acee > > On 12/15/17, 3:55 PM, "netmod on behalf of Lou Berger" > <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote: > >>All, >> This last call is closed. >> >>We note that there was an update during the LC and that no comments were >>received during the LC period. As this is simply a mechanical update >>that has been discussed in the WG we plan to proceed with the >>publication process. >> >>Authors, >> Please let/us the WG know when you have published a version ready for >>publication. Also please let the WG know what has changed in the >>document since the start of LC (rev -01) >> >>Thank you, >>NetMod Chairs >> >> >> >>On 11/29/2017 12:26 PM, Lou Berger wrote: >>> All, >>> >>> This starts a two-week working group last call on >>> draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8022bis-01. >>> >>> Please recall that this update's intention is to >>> modify the YANG module to be in line with the NMDA >>> guidelines [1]. Reviewing the diff between the two >>> drafts [2] should reveal just this. >>> >>> 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. >>> >>> [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dsdt-nmda-guidelines-01 >>> [2] >>>https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?difftype=--hwdiff&url1=rfc8022.txt&url2=dr >>>aft-ietf-netmod-rfc8022bis-01.txt >>> >>> 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 -- Ladislav Lhotka Head, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67 _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
