Hi Benoit, I’ll incorporate both comments. Thanks, Acee On 4/26/17, 9:14 AM, "Benoit Claise (bclaise)" <[email protected]> wrote:
>Benoit Claise has entered the following ballot position for >draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-key-chain-20: No Objection > >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/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html >for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > >The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: >https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-key-chain/ > > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- >COMMENT: >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >Editorial: > >- To be aligned with the other feature descriptions: >OLD: > > feature accept-tolerance { > description > "To specify the tolerance or acceptance limit."; > } > >NEW: > > feature accept-tolerance { > description > "Support the tolerance or acceptance limit."; > } > >- I would spell out "Network Management Datastore Architecture" [NMDA] > >All lights are green from a tooling point of view. >As a side note, since you used the new NMDA tree structure, I would warn >all the draft authors with YANG modules that depend on this YANG module >that they might have to update their modules. See >https://www.yangcatalog.org/yang-search/impact_analysis.php?modules[]=ietf >-key-chain&recurse=0&rfcs=0 >for the source of information. > > _______________________________________________ rtgwg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
