On 30/09/2014 21:20, Adrian Farrel wrote:
Adrian Farrel has entered the following ballot position for
charter-ietf-rtgwg-04-02: Yes
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.)
The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-rtgwg/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fully support this: a good change.
I do not believe this change needs to go for external review.
Nit...
s/an optional venue/a venue/
(There is nothing in "a venue" that implies compulsion)
---
Just noticed something we should add:
RTGWG would be a really good home for routing-related YANG models that
are not specifically covered by other RTG working groups,
The sentence above is a good addition.
and for generic
routing YANG models.
But how is this different than "routing-related YANG models"?
I believe having those two categories adds to the confusion.
Regards, Benoit
Could this be added as a work item?
.
_______________________________________________
rtgwg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
