Hi Glenn, Kathleen, In addition to discussing draft-moriarty-yangsecuritytext in the NETMOD WG session on Friday (where the conclusion was to go the AD sponsored path), I also raised this issue with the IESG/IAB at the end of the IETF week, and someone had the suggestion of filling an errata against the YANG Author Guidelines (RFC 8407) to add the missing <BEGIN TEMPLATE TEXT> and <END TEMPLATE TEXT> markers to section 3.7.1 of RFC 8407.
I know that you offered a RFC 8407-bis path, but did you also consider whether adding these markers as errata (which I would regard as being as in-scope and appropriate and could be marked as 'verified')? If this approach worked from your side, and if there are no objections from the authors or NETMOD, then I was wondering if that could be a more expedient path forward. Please let me know if errata would be sufficient from a trust perspective, otherwise, I'll go the AD sponsored route on Kathleen's draft. Regards, Rob _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
