Hi, chair, all
No, I'm not aware of any IPR that applies to this draft.
Best Regards,
Qiufang
From: Kent Watsen [mailto:kent+i...@watsen.net]
Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2023 9:47 PM
To: maqiufang (A) ; Qin Wu ; Balazs
Lengyel ; Hongwei Li
Cc: netmod@ietf.org
Subject: Regarding IPR on
Jan,
> On Aug 22, 2023, at 4:07 AM, Jan Lindblad wrote:
> The recommendation I would give for modeling bit fields with reserved bits is
> to not model them as the YANG bits type.
I think I've unfortunately caused this thread to fork in a non-productive
fashion. The unknown-bits proposal
No, I'm not aware of any IPR that applies to this draft
Hongwei Li
On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 8:46 AM Kent Watsen wrote:
> Authors, Contributors, WG,
>
> As a prerequisite for the adoption on this document:
>
> Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft identified above?
>
> Please state
Authors, Contributors, WG,
As a prerequisite for the adoption on this document:
Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft identified above?
Please state either:
"No, I'm not aware of any IPR that applies to this draft”
or
"Yes, I'm aware of IPR that applies
A new meeting session request has just been submitted by Lou Berger, a Chair
of the NETMOD Working Group.
-
Working Group Name: Network Modeling
Area Name: Operations and Management Area
Session Requester: Lou Berger
Number of
Jeff, WG,
The recommendation I would give for modeling bit fields with reserved bits is
to not model them as the YANG bits type. Even if, on the protocol level of
whatever it is that we are managing, some uint16 is divided up into three well
defined bit fields and have another few bits
