>> There has been discussion about how embedding YANG models in RFCs seems like
>> a
>> poor fit for a number of reasons. By standardizing line-folding mechanisms
>> and
>> claiming them as a best practice, this document reinforces the root of that
>> problem rather than trying to fix it.
>
> Well said, I agree with Alissa's conclusion.
Assuming 'a', yes, 'b' follows 'a'. That said, the concern is nebulous
and how to address it more so. Proposals?
Assuming the concern is process-overhead for minor spins, perhaps we
could leverage the module-versioning work as follows:
* Initial and NBC modules go thru standard RFC publishing process (i.e.,
there is still a need to publish YANG modules in RFCs).
* BC modules can skip standard publishing process but, to be an "IETF"
product (not some random fork), they would need to be released via an
IETF-owned mechanism (e.g., an Git repo) with restricted write-access.
Thoughts?
Kent
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
