Thank you Roman. We got similar feedback from Med and we will address it in
the next revision.
Regards,Reshad.
On Wednesday, June 3, 2026 at 02:38:57 PM EDT, Roman Danyliw via
Datatracker <[email protected]> wrote:
Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-netmod-yang-module-versioning-16: Discuss
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please refer to
https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/
for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-yang-module-versioning/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
** Section 9.2
In all cases, IANA MUST follow the versioning guidance specified in
Section 3.1, and MUST include a "rev:non-backwards-compatible"
substatement to the latest revision statement whenever an IANA
maintained module is updated in a non-backwards-compatible way, as
described in Section 3.2.
Please do not use BCP14 keywords in IANA considerations text. See
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/statement-iesg-statement-on-clarifying-the-use-of-bcp-14-key-words/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you to Joel Halpern for the GENART review.
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
