Hi,
On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 8:42 AM Mahesh Jethanandani
wrote:
> Hi Med,
>
> On Jan 21, 2024, at 11:44 PM, mohamed.boucad...@orange.com wrote:
>
> Hi Acee,
>
> > I think these points are worth addressing in RFC8407 BIS.
>
> We do already have the following in the bis, which I think covers your
Hi Med,
> On Jan 21, 2024, at 11:44 PM, mohamed.boucad...@orange.com wrote:
>
> Hi Acee,
>
> > I think these points are worth addressing in RFC8407 BIS.
>
> We do already have the following in the bis, which I think covers your
> initial question about “mandatory true” data nodes for
Re-,
I’m afraid that if we call out “mandatory” here, we will need to do the same
for all the items listed in rfc8342#section-5.3:
Only semantic constraints MAY be violated. These are the YANG
"when", "must", "mandatory", "unique", "min-elements", and
"max-elements" statements; and the
The Network Modeling (netmod) WG will hold a virtual interim meeting on
2024-02-06 from 09:00 to 11:00 America/New_York (14:00 to 16:00 UTC).
Agenda:
To discuss the "immutable-flag" draft.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ma-netmod-immutable-flag
Information about remote
Hi all,
There is no YANG Versioning weekly call on January 23rd.
I'd encourage everyone to try and attend the Virtual Interim for system config
instead.
Jason (he/him)
___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
Hi Med,
> On Jan 22, 2024, at 02:44, mohamed.boucad...@orange.com wrote:
>
> Hi Acee,
>
> > I think these points are worth addressing in RFC8407 BIS.
>
> We do already have the following in the bis, which I think covers your
> initial question about “mandatory true” data nodes for
I’m going to schedule this Interim now but, please be advised that, per Jan’s
comment on for the "system-config” interim, the “CET” label should’ve been
“UTC” instead.
Kent
> On Jan 11, 2024, at 6:18 PM, Kent Watsen wrote:
>
> Dear NETMOD WG,
>
> The chairs would like to schedule an
