Sorry missed a couple in previous reply.

Christian Hopps <[email protected]> writes:

Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker <[email protected]> writes:

Section 5.1.2

The following subsection suggests that there is a "heading" field in the
W3C structure/API, but I don't see one listed in Figure 1.


Yes, there was even a blank line where it originally was, na errant D or 
something in vi. :)

I've put it back.

Section 6.1

What are suitable references for the "me" and "mola-vik-1" geoedtic
systems?  I do not see how just the listed descriptions provide a "clear
definition" even for the two coordinate values latitude/longitude.

I've included a reference for 'me', and removed mola-vik-1 b/c it was simply 
too hard to find a good reference for it.

Section 7

Thanks for using the template for security considerations for YANG
models!  I think that since some of the portions of the template do not
apply, they can safely be removed.  In particular, the "these are the
subtrees and data nodes and their sensitivity/vulnerability" lines can
go, and the clause about "can have a negative effect on network
operations" may be worth tweaking (network operations may not be the
most likely thing to be impacted).  I think it's also okay to drop the
paragraph/sentence about RPCs.

Updated.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

Reply via email to