Re: [netmod] WGLC on draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6991-bis-11

On 18/02/2022 18.11, Andy Bierman wrote: On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 8:39 AM Martin Björklund > wrote: Hi, I didn't find any discussion about the new percent types in the list archives.  Do we really need three types for percent?  We can now express

[netmod] The "resolve-system" parameter in the new "with-system" I-D

[As a contributor] This message regards the value of the "resolve-system” parameter defined in the latest “with-system” draft. The "resolve-system” parameter is defined in its own optional-to-implement module. The question is if the WG believes the parameter is valuable or if the module

[netmod] The new "with-system" I-D

[As a contributor] This message merely provides some insight behind the latest update to the "with-system" draft. [PS: “with-system” is now a misnomer, it is a holdover from when the solution mimicked the “with-defaults” RFC.] The latest “with-system” draft is nearly the polar-opposite of the

Re: [netmod] Regarding IPR on Regarding IPR on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-semver-06

"No, I'm not aware of any IPR that applies to this draft" Regards, Balazs -Original Message- From: Benoit Claise Sent: Tuesday, 1 February, 2022 08:16 To: Lou Berger ; jcla...@cisco.com; rwil...@cisco.com; res...@yahoo.com; Balázs Lengyel ; jason.ste...@nokia.com Cc: NetMod WG ;

Re: [netmod] WGLC on draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6991-bis-11

On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 8:39 AM Martin Björklund wrote: > Hi, > > I didn't find any discussion about the new percent types in the list > archives. Do we really need three types for percent? We can now > express 4294967295 percent, but not 10.5 percent. > > IMO it is a mistake to have too many

Re: [netmod] WGLC on draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6991-bis-11

Hi, I didn't find any discussion about the new percent types in the list archives. Do we really need three types for percent? We can now express 4294967295 percent, but not 10.5 percent. The new tables look good. s/6020/6021/g though. /martin Jürgen Schönwälder wrote: > On Tue, Feb 15,

Re: [netmod] Regarding IPR on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-module-versioning-05

"No, I'm not aware of any IPR that applies to this draft" Thanks, Balazs -Original Message- From: Rob Wilton (rwilton) Sent: Tuesday, 1 February, 2022 15:05 To: Lou Berger ; Joe Clarke (jclarke) ; res...@yahoo.com; Balázs Lengyel ; jason.ste...@nokia.com Cc: NetMod WG ; NetMod WG

Re: [netmod] WGLC on draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6991-bis-11

On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 12:12:04PM +, maqiufang (A) wrote: > I have only one comment: It seems that Table 2 doesn’t list all the > types defined in “ietf-inet-types” YANG module, e.g., > protocol-number, ip-address-link-local, ip-address-and-prefix… > Should this be fixed? Yes, this should