I should add, as a contributor, I have read this document and think that
is ready for advancement.
I have three minor comments:
1) module "feature" in YANG library is a leaf-list, but currently it is
a list in YANG libary bis. I suspect that this is due to one of the
incarnations when it contained additional information. I think that we
should revert it back to being a leaf list for consistency.
2) Lada recommended that module "deviation" be made a leaf-list. I also
support changing this for consistency with "feature" above, but don't
feel too strongly on this one.
3) I think the "modules" list is also allowed to included modules that
don't actually contain any nodes that require implementation. Hence, it
might be useful of the "modules" description statement explicitly stated
this. I.e. perhaps something like:
"This list may contain modules that do not contain any schema nodes that
require implementation. For example, it could contain a module that
only defines types and not any data nodes, RPCs, actions, notifications,
or deviations."
Thanks,
Rob
On 02/02/2018 13:51, Kent Watsen wrote:
As co-author, I am not aware of any IPR related to this document.
As a contributor, I have read this document and think that it is ready
for advancement.
Kent
On 2/2/18, 4:30 AM, "Netconf on behalf of Robert Wilton"
<netconf-boun...@ietf.org <mailto:netconf-boun...@ietf.org> on behalf
of rwil...@cisco.com <mailto:rwil...@cisco.com>> wrote:
I am not aware of any IPR related to this document.
Thanks,
Rob
On 01/02/2018 18:59, Mahesh Jethanandani wrote:
WG,
The authors of rfc7895bis have indicated that they believe the
document is ready for LC[1].
This starts a two week LC on the draft
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__tools.ietf.org_html_draft-2Dietf-2Dnetconf-2Drfc7895bis-2D04&d=DwMD-g&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=9zkP0xnJUvZGJ9EPoOH7Yhqn2gsBYaGTvjISlaJdcZo&m=fi_opjj4kio7eufRXSQSi8dSjJNlkVDo8a1F0zsCrfE&s=MqbVljnYqIk9w78kcfp7oUqGR-qVoNV90njyTwLAdpc&e=>.
The LC will end on February 15.
Please send your comments on this thread. Reviews of the document,
and statement of support are particularly helpful to the authors.
If you have concerns about the document, please state those too.
Authors please indicate if you are aware of any IPR on the document.
Thanks.
[1]
https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netconf/current/msg13980.html
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mail-2Darchive_web_netconf_current_msg13980.html&d=DwMD-g&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=9zkP0xnJUvZGJ9EPoOH7Yhqn2gsBYaGTvjISlaJdcZo&m=fi_opjj4kio7eufRXSQSi8dSjJNlkVDo8a1F0zsCrfE&s=XhRSSTWifO-SkPi2CWK5Z5aUni2F1qRQ8Moj7T7gI-Y&e=>
Mahesh & Kent
_______________________________________________
Netconf mailing list
netc...@ietf.org <mailto:netc...@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_netconf&d=DwMD-g&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=9zkP0xnJUvZGJ9EPoOH7Yhqn2gsBYaGTvjISlaJdcZo&m=fi_opjj4kio7eufRXSQSi8dSjJNlkVDo8a1F0zsCrfE&s=mcDF-v5I4epgsuWLHvr32pZ5mRonROKN8zpKcZWBC0o&e=>
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
