Hi, There is one open erratum on NMDA from 2018 that I would like to process.
The erratum is here: https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5514 There has been quite a lot of discussion on this erratum previously on the NETMOD alias. The last email in the thread was https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/LHJZmf5gtESX6Nobwst0OwXbGG4/ >From my reading of the discussion, I don't think that there is clear WG >consensus between the two competing concerns: (1) The origin for any top-level configuration data nodes must be specified (section 7, YANG annotation definition). (2) The origin applies to all configuration nodes except non-presence containers (section 5.3.4). Hence my proposal is to mark this as "Hold for Document Update" with Kent's proposed resolution of changing the description in the YANG model. OLD: The origin for any top-level configuration data nodes must be specified. NEW: The origin for any top-level configuration data nodes, except non-presence containers, must be specified. For reference, this will mean that the extension [NEW] is defined as: md:annotation origin { type origin-ref; description "The 'origin' annotation can be present on any configuration data node in the operational state datastore. It specifies from where the node originated. If not specified for a given configuration data node, then the origin is the same as the origin of its parent node in the data tree. The origin for any top-level configuration data nodes, except non-presence containers, must be specified."; } Please can you let me know if you support or object to this resolution. I'll leave it a week to see if there is consensus before processing the erratum. Regards, Rob _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
