I'm reading through this draft and generally okay with the flow (though I not that provider is misspelled in Section 2), but one thing sticks out.
Why is attachment-interface a raw string on now a reference to an actual interface? Seeing Benoit credited on this work, I wonder what he'd say since I know something he's passionate about is being able to have meaningful references between objects (which YANG allows for) so that, in this case, I can more easily and unambiguously determine services attached to a given interface. I'm fully ready to admit I might have missed a point on that. But reading through the example in the Appendix B still left me scratching my head. Thanks. Joe _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list OPSAWG@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
