On 2/22/2018 11:49 AM, t.petch wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kent Watsen" <kwat...@juniper.net>
To: "t.petch" <ie...@btconnect.com>; "NETMOD Working Group"
<netmod@ietf.org>
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2018 5:06 PM
Kent

You illustrate beautifully the problem I would like a solution to.

The current thinking AFAICT is that tree-diagrams
should be an Informative Reference.

Therefore, the RFC Editor will not hold publication until an RFC
number
is assigned.

Therefore, a note asking the I-D reference to be updated to reflect
the
assigned RFC number is null - the RFC can be published with the
reference as an i-d and not as an RFC which is what I expect the RFC
Editor to do.

QED

Except I know that this draft will be stuck in MISREF state and
tree-diagrams
will in fact be assigned an RFC number by the time this draft is
published.

Kent

Corner case:-)
Note that, for this corner case, the IESG agreed for the tree-diagrams to go through expedited processing. Even if this is an informative reference, it's nicer to get an RFC as a reference.

Regards, Benoit


You cannot know in general that drafts that appear as Informational
References and which are referenced from within a YANG module will be
published before the referencing I-D will be and so will have a RFC
number which can be inserted by the RFC Editor.



_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

Reply via email to