Re: [netmod] call for consensus to adopt draft-wilton-netmod-intf-ext-yang as NETMOD WG draft

Thank you, Robert. Some additional information for Tom and all. Yes. We are now working on the PAR, CSD and Objectives of this project. Once they are approved, there will be a Task Force to work on the Ethernet models. You can find relative documents and information at

Re: [netmod] call for consensus to adopt draft-wilton-netmod-intf-ext-yang as NETMOD WG draft

Hi Tom, Yes, 802.3 passed a CFI (call-for-interest) at the last IEEE plenary and have formed a study group to create a PAR (project authorization request). Once the PAR has passed then there will be a formal design team to work on the Ethernet models. Thanks, Rob On 27/04/2016 10:06,

Re: [netmod] AD review draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis-11 (part 2)

On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 12:38:00PM +0200, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > And also: > > OLD: > >o If a request modifies a configuration data node such that any > > node's "when" expression becomes false, then the node with the > > "when" expression is deleted by the server. > > > >

Re: [netmod] datastores Re: AD review draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis-11 (part 1)

Tom, I see that the definition of 'datastores' has cropped up in this AD Review, as in the e-mail below. Meanwhile, draft-ietf-i2rs-pub-sub-requirements-05.txt is in IETF Last Call and redefines, or recreates, the term for us A YANG datastore is a conceptual datastore that contains

Re: [netmod] datastores Re: AD review draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis-11 (part 1)

Tom, please send a comment to i2rs saying that they should import terms rather than trying to (re-)define them. As long as people keep (re-)defining terms, we will have confusion and in this specific case I think it is the NETMOD or NETCONF WGs that should define the terms, not any other WGs.

Re: [netmod] AD review draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis-11 (part 1)

On 4/27/2016 12:43 PM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: Benoit Claise wrote: Hi Martin, Benoit Claise wrote: Hi Martin, Removed some extra ones on which we agree. See in line. - Terminology: The following terms are defined in [RFC6241

[netmod] datastores Re: AD review draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis-11 (part 1)

I see that the definition of 'datastores' has cropped up in this AD Review, as in the e-mail below. Meanwhile, draft-ietf-i2rs-pub-sub-requirements-05.txt is in IETF Last Call and redefines, or recreates, the term for us A YANG datastore is a conceptual datastore that contains hierarchical

Re: [netmod] call for consensus to adopt draft-wilton-netmod-intf-ext-yang as NETMOD WG draft

Kent Has there been any progress in the IEEE on their work to produce Ethernet related models, as was mentioned earlier on in this thread? Tom Petch - Original Message - From: "Kent Watsen" To: Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2016 4:18 PM Subject: Re:

Re: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model-07.txt

Clyde Weeell; I still think that we may regret having so many features and so many possible combinations; For me, it is not a question of whether they are there in the wild but whether it is right to have such a complex model; a bit like ABNF where all sorts of things are possible but sometimes

Re: [netmod] AD review draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis-11 (part 1)

Benoit Claise writes: > Hi Martin, >> Benoit Claise wrote: >>> Hi Martin, >>> >>> Removed some extra ones on which we agree. >>> See in line. >>> - Terminology: >>> The following terms are defined in [RFC6241 >>>

Re: [netmod] AD review draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis-11 (part 1)

On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 12:43:24PM +0200, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > Ok, how about moving the specialized-meaning-text to its own paragraph: > > > The following terms are defined in [RFC6241]: > >o configuration data > >o configuration datastore > >o datastore > >o

Re: [netmod] AD review draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis-11 (part 1)

Benoit Claise wrote: > Hi Martin, > > Benoit Claise wrote: > >> Hi Martin, > >> > >> Removed some extra ones on which we agree. > >> See in line. > >> - Terminology: > >> The following terms are defined in [RFC6241 > >>

Re: [netmod] AD review draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis-11 (part 2)

Benoit Claise wrote: > Dear all, > > Here is second and final part of my AD review. > > -7.14.3. The output Statement > >If a "config" statement is present for any node in the output tree, >the "config" statement is ignored. > > What does "ignored" mean? It means

Re: [netmod] AD review draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis-11 (part 1)

On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 12:04:03PM +0200, Benoit Claise wrote: > > > > > This issue is with "The following terms are defined in [RFC6241]", but > > > > > you re-define those terms. > > > > I don't think it is correct to say that we "re-define" these terms. > > It sounds like we give the terms a

Re: [netmod] AD review draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis-11 (part 1)

Benoit Claise wrote: > Hi Martin, > > Removed some extra ones on which we agree. > See in line. > > > - Terminology: > The following terms are defined in [RFC6241 > ]: > > ... > > o