>> The authors of yang-data-ext met today to discuss how to move this
>> draft forward. After about an hour, we decided that the best course
>> of action is to:
>>
>> * clarify RFC 8040 rc:yang-data for the zerotouch use case
>> - and update the zerotouch draft to use rc:yang-data
>>
>> * request this WG for the unadoption of this draft
>> - the notification-messages draft solution is TBD
>>
>> Can the working group, especially the chairs and the affected document
>> authors (all CC-ed) please review this proposal?
>
> What about the ability to augment yang-data? The proposed instance data
> draft also makes use of yang-data-ext, and I have a use case to augment
> some of its MD. I realize this draft is not a WG item [yet], but I
> wonder what the co-authors thought around the fate of the augments work.
This is what I meant by "TBD" above. Undoubtedly, the notification-messages
draft will need to see if there is another way to achieve its end and, if
not, we (NETMOD) will be asked to define an "augment-yang-data" draft, which
just defines the "augment" part of this draft on top of RFC 8040 rc:yang-data.
To those who say that we need a new version of YANG to do this properly, it
seems that we're making an argument for starting YANG-next now.
> Joe
Kent // as co-author
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
