Re: [netmod] FW: I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8022bis-06.txt

Thanks Acee, Minor question for the working group and the draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-rip authors. The appendix is about adding a new control-plane protocol. It takes as an example RIP. However, draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-rip is being finalized (on the IESG telechat on Jan 11th). Does it make sense to

Re: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-revised-datastores-09.txt

Dear all, We all know it's important to deliver NMDA soon. I'm sending this document to IETF LC now, till Jan 10th. If Vladimir's concern needs to be discussed further, let's do so part the IETF LC. Regards, Benoit Just an FYI - I requested that the authors republish so that all could see the

Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-entity-06

On 12/21/2017 1:03 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 12:58:26PM +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote: Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 12:37:46PM +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote: Hi, I need WG input on this issue. The question is how to handle 'serial-num',

Re: [netmod] YANG module security considerations

Dear all, The proposed change has been applied to https://trac.ietf.org/trac/ops/wiki/yang-security-guidelines For all document authors, please apply the new template. Diff at https://trac.ietf.org/trac/ops/wiki/yang-security-guidelines?action=diff&version=13&old_version=12 Regards, Benoit

[netmod] AD review: draft-ietf-netmod-revised-datastores-08

Dear all, In order not to be the bottleneck in the process and assuming that the document will be in "publication requested" pretty soon, here is my AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-revised-datastores-08 - 5.3.2. Missing Resources Configuration in can refer to resources that are n

Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-entity-06

Dear all, One more comment, which I forgot in my AD review. The -state YANG module in the appendix should actually be "deprecated". Regards, Benoit Dear all, Here is my AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-entity-06. Note that if you post the new version soon (before the end of this week), I could

Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-entity-06

On 12/20/2017 4:00 PM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: Benoit Claise wrote: Hi Martin, Thanks. Only kept the relevant excerpts. - Some objects are read-write in RFC6933: entPhysicalSerialNum entPhysicalAlias entPhysicalAssetID entPhysicalUris For example

Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-entity-06

Hi Martin, Thanks. Only kept the relevant excerpts. - Some objects are read-write in RFC6933: entPhysicalSerialNum entPhysicalAlias entPhysicalAssetID entPhysicalUris For example, entPhysicalSerialNum being read-write always bothered me. serial-num is now "config f

[netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-entity-06

Dear all, Here is my AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-entity-06. Note that if you post the new version soon (before the end of this week), I could start the IETF last call, and the draft could be on Jan 11th IESG telechat. - I don't believe that the RFC 2119 keywords are right on the following

Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-rfc7223bis-01

Perfect. Thank you. Regards, B. Benoit Claise wrote: Dear all, In order not to be the bottleneck in the process, here is my AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-rfc7223bis-01 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-rfc7223bis/> Editorial: - An interface is identified by it

[netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-rfc7277bis-01

Dear all, In order not to be the bottleneck in the process, here is my AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-rfc7277bis-01 All looks good. Thank you. Martin already noticed the Security Considerations template Regards, Benoit (as OPS

[netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-rfc7223bis-01

Dear all, In order not to be the bottleneck in the process, here is my AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-rfc7223bis-01 Editorial: - An interface is identified by its name, which is unique within the server. This property is

[netmod] Joel Jaeggli as a third NETMOD co-chair

Dear all, A lot is happening these days in the world of data modeling-driven management at the IETF:     NMDA architecture, NETCONF, RESTCONF     NMDA-compliant YANG modules: some RFC bis modules but also new ones     Guidelines: RFC6087bis and the tree diagram     The interaction with NETCONF:

Re: [netmod] Fwd: Blog: YANG Data Models in the Industry: Current State of Affairs

. Forwarded Message Subject: Blog: YANG Data Models in the Industry: Current State of Affairs Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2017 17:15:21 +0100 From: Benoit Claise To: IETF-Discussion list Dear all, https://www.ietf.org/blog/2017/12/yang-data-models-in-the-industry-current

[netmod] Fwd: Blog: YANG Data Models in the Industry: Current State of Affairs

Forwarding. I know that some of you are not on the i...@ietf.org mailing list. Regards, Benoit. Forwarded Message Subject:Blog: YANG Data Models in the Industry: Current State of Affairs Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2017 17:15:21 +0100 From: Benoit Claise To: IETF

Re: [netmod] intended status of the tree diagram document

erger' ; netmod@ietf.org; 'Benoit Claise' ; 'Juergen Schoenwaelder' Subject: Re: [netmod] intended status of the tree diagram document Kent: A common way to express tree-diagrams in Yang documents provides a common and clear to describe the models. This would be really helpful

Re: [netmod] review of draft-acee-netmod-rfc8022bis-05

On 11/3/2017 5:49 PM, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote: Hi Vladimir, Thanks for comments - see inline. On 10/29/17, 8:43 PM, "netmod on behalf of Vladimir Vassilev" wrote: Hello, I have reviewed draft-acee-netmod-rfc8022bis-05. My conclusion is that the YANG modules part of the draft have been succ

Re: [netmod] Fwd: Blog: YANG Catalog Latest Developments (IETF 100 Hackathon)

Good one. I thought about keeping it, just because :-) I like the 'IETF 1000 hackathon' typo - this makes it indeed 'best continuing work' I would say. ;-) /js On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 04:02:44PM +0100, Benoit Claise wrote: Forwarding. I know that some of you are not

[netmod] Fwd: Blog: YANG Catalog Latest Developments (IETF 100 Hackathon)

Forwarding. I know that some of you are not on the i...@ietf.org mailing list. Regards, Benoit. Forwarded Message Subject:Blog: YANG Catalog Latest Developments (IETF 100 Hackathon) Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2017 16:01:49 +0100 From: Benoit Claise To: IETF-Discussion

[netmod] NETMOD bottlenecks for draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-vrrp and draft-ietf-rtwg-yang-rip publications

Dear all, Currently sitting in the rtgwg WG. draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-vrrp and draft-ietf-rtwg-yang-rip are currently in AD review. Let's look at the datatracker new YANG-related URLs to understand the impact analysis (the dependent YANG modules) for these two drafts: * https://www.yangcatalog

[netmod] YANG module metada and impact analysis links in the datatracker (New datatracker release: v6.64.0)

Dear all, Here are two useful URLs in the datatracker if you care about YANG modules. This was announced in Henrik's email "New datatracker release: v6.64.0", but let me stress this again. If you take for example this draft: draft-ietf-netmod-rfc7223bis The tracker, at https://datatracker.iet

Re: [netmod] draft-clacla-netmod-yang-model-update-00.txt : Re: [RTG-DIR] handling module incompatibility => handling module transition

bar.  If it is OK to break backward-compatibility then it will become increasingly difficult to just use the latest version of a module. Real interoperability at the granularity of modules will become more difficult. YANG packages can dramatic

[netmod] draft-clacla-netmod-yang-model-update-00.txt : Re: [RTG-DIR] handling module incompatibility => handling module transition

solutions, such as new YANG keywords, but at this point in time, it's important to recognize that we need to change the way we produce YANG modules at the IETF. Let's discuss on the list and during the NETMOD meeting. Regards, Benoit. On 10/12/2017 3:30 PM, Benoit Claise wrote: Hi

Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 (5157)

Dear all, Shall I validate this one? Regards, Benoit The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7950, "The YANG 1.1 Data Modeling Language". -- You may review the report below and at: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5157 -

Re: [netmod] draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis as a BCP?

s, Benoit Kent On 9/11/17, 10:16 AM, "netmod on behalf of Benoit Claise" mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org> on behalf of bcla...@cisco.com <mailto:bcla...@cisco.com>> wrote: Dear all, I'm wondering if it's not time to classify draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis as

Re: [netmod] [RTG-DIR] handling module incompatibility => handling module transition

On 10/12/2017 3:30 PM, Benoit Claise wrote: Hi Lou, So circling back to the original question: what do we do about the non backward-compatible module being defined in rfc8049bis? While being sympathetic to many of the comments made below as well as the "do over" concept,

Re: [netmod] [RTG-DIR] handling module incompatibility => handling module transition

atic and complete solution. option 2 is just half a step in the right direction. I believe we should discuss this topic in Singapore. Regards, Benoit (as individual contributor) Lou On October 8, 2017 10:59:15 AM Benoit Claise wrote: Dear all, Focusing on draft-wu-l3sm-rfc8049bis, the big p

Re: [netmod] ietf-routing or ietf-routing-2? module naming convention for NMDA transition. Re: upcoming adoptions

On 10/6/2017 6:01 PM, Robert Wilton wrote: On 06/10/2017 16:32, Martin Bjorklund wrote: Benoit Claise wrote: Dear all, [including the routing and multicast YANG design teams] Can we please finalize the discussion regarding ietf-routing versus ietf-routing-2, sooner than later. I care

Re: [netmod] handling module incompatibility => handling module transition

Dear all, Focusing on draft-wu-l3sm-rfc8049bis, the big problem is: RFC8049 is broken. The small problem is: trying to maintain backward compatibility. draft-wu-l3sm-rfc8049bis has rightly focused on the big problem. Let me extend the scope of this email thread from "handling module incompati

[netmod] New Version Notification for draft-clacla-netmod-model-catalog-02.txt

etf.org To: Benoit Claise , Joe Clarke A new version of I-D, draft-clacla-netmod-model-catalog-02.txt has been successfully submitted by Benoit Claise and posted to the IETF repository. Name: draft-clacla-netmod-model-catalog Revision: 02 Title: YANG module for yangc

[netmod] ietf-routing or ietf-routing-2? module naming convention for NMDA transition. Re: upcoming adoptions

Dear all, [including the routing and multicast YANG design teams] Can we please finalize the discussion regarding ietf-routing versus ietf-routing-2, sooner than later. I care about the NMDA transition strategy. Here are all the ietf-routing dependent YANG modules (those modules that depend

Re: [netmod] upcoming adoptions - this appendix is normative

Dear all, To avoid any confusion, just clearly mention it.     "This appendix is normative | informative" No need to debate for hours on this. Regards, Benoit - Original Message - From: "Lou Berger" Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2017 6:06 PM On 9/14/2017 12:36 PM, t.petch wrote: App

Re: [netmod] syslog-model-17 shepherd writeup issues -references

Clyde, Do you know your next step to progress this document? Regards, Benoit I meant to say something about the .1 vs .2 difference. My comment assumes that it's supposed to be .1, but we of course should use whatever is correct. I also don't know much about that standards body. K. -

[netmod] semver.org comparison of two YANG modules

Dear all, In light of draft-claise-semver-01 , and thinking about adding an extra metadata piece of information to a YANG module (for example here ), I'm wonderi

Re: [netmod] Proposal to enhance the YANG tree output

Hi Joe, On 9/14/17 13:50, Martin Bjorklund wrote: Andy Bierman wrote: Hi, Actually I liked the early pyang output that was concise and easy to remember. The current format gets very cluttered and there are too many little symbols to remember them all. I agree with Andy. I also did some exp

[netmod] AD review: draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model-17

Dear all, I understand that draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model should be on my plate very soon (waiting for the WriteUp) In order to speed up the process, here is my AD review. - metadata: https://www.yangcatalog.org/yang-search/module_details.php?module=ietf-syslog     compilation status: passe

[netmod] draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis as a BCP?

Dear all, I'm wondering if it's not time to classify draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis as a BCP, as opposed to informational This text would need to change: This document is similar to the Structure of Management Information version 2 (SMIv2) usage guidelines specification [RF

Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6991 (5105)

On 9/4/2017 10:12 AM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: Juergen Schoenwaelder píše v Pá 01. 09. 2017 v 18:48 +0200: On Fri, Sep 01, 2017 at 07:40:56AM -0700, RFC Errata System wrote: The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6991, "Common YANG Data Types".

Re: [netmod] upcoming adoptions

Kent, Hey folks, As discussed at the last meeting, we are heading to revising existing RFCs to align them with NMDA. The first batch have been published as individual drafts: 1. https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bjorklund-netmod-rfc7223bis-00 2. https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bjorklund-net

Re: [netmod] Potential additions to rfc6087bis: RegEx guidelines

In this discussion, let's keep in mind that the openconfig modules use the POSIX regex while the IETF uses the W3C regex. So for operators that have to deal with a mix of openconfig and IETF modules, this type of advice could be handy from a tooling point of view. Such advice, if not in RFC6087b

[netmod] YumaPro SDK 17.10-B3 and yanglint 0.13.49 upgraded on claise.be

Dear all, With these two upgrades, we received way more warnings. Most comes from yanglint, to be candid. Please check your YANG modules at http://www.claise.be/IETFYANGPageCompilation.html About 50 YANG modules PASSED previously and now report PASSED WITH WARNINGS. It's great that validators

Re: [netmod] RFC 8199 on YANG Module Classification

Dear all, The good news is that the module-classification is already added as a metadata in the yangcatalog.org. leaf module-classification { type enumeration { enum network-service { description "Network Service YANG Module that describes

[netmod] Fwd: YANG Catalog Latest Development (IETF 99 Hackathon)

atest Development (IETF 99 Hackathon) Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2017 17:05:35 +0200 From: Benoit Claise To: annou...@yangcatalog.org Dear all, On behalf of the full team of dedicated people. http://www.claise.be/2017/07/yang-catalog-latest-development-ietf-99-hackathon/ Regards, Joe and B

Re: [netmod] draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-11 issue #3

raised the question of whether it should be defined as a string, when ether-types are well known types. Is there a IETF-IEEE co-ordination meeting planned in Prague? Yes, Saturday afternoon. regards, B. On Jul 11, 2017, at 3:25 AM, Benoit Claise <mailto:bcla...@cisco.com>> wrote: H

[netmod] draft-ietf-netmod-revised-datastores-03 feedback

Dear all, Good job on this document. Some comments below. - OLD: o learned configuration: Configuration that has been learned via protocol interactions with other systems that is not conventional or dynamic configuration. NEW (is this what wou want to say?): o learned con

Re: [netmod] draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-11 issue #3

Hi, In order to look at what has been done already, the advice is to look at YANG search . I searched on "ether.type" with the regex flag. Don't pay attention to the last entry, this will be fixed. However, specifically pay attention to

[netmod] netmod documents

Dear all, In preparation for our meetings next week. Regards, Benoit $ wgstatus -s netmod Getting IETF document states Getting IETF docs for netmod Getting IETF RFCs for netmod Getting history for draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model Getting history for draft-ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams Getting hi

[netmod] YANG module for yangcatalog.org

Dear all, Here is the YANG module behind the yangcatalog.org. See https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-clacla-netmod-model-catalog/ While implementing the catalog and tools at yangcatalog.org, we initially looked at the "Catalog and registry for YANG models" [I-D.openconfig-netmod-model-cata

[netmod] toolchains improvements: validators and xym updated

Dear all, Regarding the different toolchains... _On claise.be_ Now uses pyang 1.7.3, yangdump-pro 16.10-9, yanglint 0.12.186, and confd-6.4 Xym has been updated with a new ""--force-revision" flag. It will reports errors such as discrepancies in revision dates (CODE BEGINS and YANG revision), b

[netmod] Fwd: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF on IP Services Approved Draft 1"

FYI. Regards, B. Forwarded Message Subject: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF on IP Services Approved Draft 1" Date: Wed, 3 May 2017 08:24:58 -0700 From: Liaison Statement Management Tool To: Benoit Claise , Alvaro Retana , Alia Atlas , Debora

Re: [netmod] Important: Guidelines for YANG module authors

Andy On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 6:56 AM, Benoit Claise <mailto:bcla...@cisco.com>> wrote: Dear all, Now that the new NETMOD and NETCONF charters have been approved, it's time to think about the guidelines for YANG module authors. The Network Management Datastore Ar

[netmod] Important: Guidelines for YANG module authors

m, Chris Hopps, Juergen Schoenwaelder, and all others who helped develop these guidelines. Regards, Alia Atlas, Routing AD Deborah Brungard, Routing AD Alvaro Retana, Routing AD Warren Kumari, Operations & Management AD Benoit Claise, Operations & Management AD

Re: [netmod] Deborah Brungard's Yes on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-07: (with COMMENT)

On 6/8/2017 2:20 PM, Deborah Brungard wrote: Deborah Brungard has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-07: Yes 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

Re: [netmod] Alia Atlas' Yes on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-07: (with COMMENT)

On 6/7/2017 5:16 AM, Eric Rescorla wrote: Module pedigree seems good. Other alternatives might be "module ownership" or "module origin" Seeing this now, I agree with "module origin" :-) Regards, B. On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 9:30 PM, Alia Atlas > wrote: Alia Atlas

Re: [netmod] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-07: (with COMMENT)

On 6/7/2017 12:13 AM, Adam Roach wrote: Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-07: 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 t

Re: [netmod] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-07: (with COMMENT)

Hi Ben, Thanks for your review. See in-line. Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-07: 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

Re: [netmod] draft-vallin-netmod-alarm-module status and plans

William, This was discussed with the authors, the NETMOD chairs, and the RTG AD Deborah. The advice was for the authors to raise the draft in ccamp and try to progress it there. The authors updated their draft to version 2 and pinged the CCAMP mailing list (https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive

Re: [netmod] Last Call: (YANG Module Classification) to Informational RFC

Hi Jonathan, See https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-07 for the applied changes. The sentence is section 2.2 has been removed: it was too hard to parse (and was not strictly needed for this draft). Regards, Benoit Thanks Jonathan, See in line. I h

Re: [netmod] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-06

Thanks Pete, Version 7 has been posted. All your feedback has been taken into account. https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-07 Regards, Benoit Reviewer: Pete Resnick Review result: Ready with Issues I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The

[netmod] OPEN ONLINE YANG REPOSITORY ENHANCES NETWORK MANAGEMENT AND BOOSTS OPERATIONAL EFFICIENCY

Dear all, https://www.ietf.org/media/yang-catalog-20170516.html As I mentioned a few times, creating data models is great but we have to make sure that they work well together. Also, the data model metadata are getting more and more important, and must be integrated in the tool chain. This is

Re: [netmod] Last Call: (YANG Module Classification) to Informational RFC

Thanks Jonathan, See in line. I have no substantive comments, but have noticed, among other things, a few somewhat inconsequential typos that could nevertheless impact readability, particularly for those for whom English is a second language: • Page 3, penultimate bullet: s/by network operato

[netmod] YumaPro 16.10-7 and yanglint 0.12.161 installed in the toolchain

Dear all, YumaPro 16.10-7 solves this problem (and certainly others): Error: Mandatory object 'xxx' not allowed in external augment statement .yang:y.z: error(335): mandatory object not allowed The impacted YANG drafts were: draft-ietf-netconf-yang-push draft-ietf-netmod-sub-intf-

Re: [netmod] Alia Atlas' Yes on charter-ietf-netmod-08-05: (with COMMENT)

Hi Alia, Hi Benoit, On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 10:00 AM, Benoit Claise <mailto:bcla...@cisco.com>> wrote: Hi Alia, Now that you are back from vacation... Alia Atlas has entered the following ballot position for charter-ietf-netmod-08-05: Yes When r

Re: [netmod] Alia Atlas' Yes on charter-ietf-netmod-08-05: (with COMMENT)

Hi Alia, Now that you are back from vacation... Alia Atlas has entered the following ballot position for charter-ietf-netmod-08-05: Yes 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 para

Re: [netmod] security considerations boilerplate updates to cover RESTCONF

Dear all, The new YANG module security guidelines have been posted, in agreement with our SEC AD Kathleen. See https://trac.ietf.org/trac/ops/wiki/yang-security-guidelines Regards, Benoit Dear all, As discussed during the IESG telechat today, we should only focus on the addition of the REST

Re: [netmod] Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on charter-ietf-netmod-08-01: (with COMMENT)

Hi Spencer, Spencer Dawkins has entered the following ballot position for charter-ietf-netmod-08-01: 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.) The

[netmod] draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis: milestones in the new charter proposal

Dear all, draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis went back to the WG. In the new charter proposal, https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-netmod/, I introduced this milestone. Jul 2017 - Submit draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis to IESG for publication (as Informational) Same date

Re: [netmod] Warren Kumari's No Objection on charter-ietf-netmod-08-02: (with COMMENT)

On 4/4/2017 9:31 AM, Warren Kumari wrote: Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for charter-ietf-netmod-08-02: 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

[netmod] Progressing the new NETMOD charter

Dear all, Thanks for the NETMOD chartering discussion. I took ownership of the new charter text, which is now at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-netmod/, and I will progress it. https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=https%3A%2F%2Fdatatracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fcharter-ietf-netmod%2Fwi

Re: [netmod] draft netmod charter update proposal

be finalized within 4 months and NC/RC-bis will take another 4-5 months. Thanks, Mehmet -Original Message- From: Kent Watsen [mailto:kwat...@juniper.net] Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2017 9:48 PM To: Mehmet Ersue ; 'Lou Berger' ; netmod@ietf.org Cc: 'Benoit Claise' ;

Re: [netmod] draft netmod charter update proposal

assification. I assume it can be added with a sentence to a) or b). Thanks, Mehmet -Original Message- From: Mehmet Ersue Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2017 11:59 PM To: Lou Berger ; 'Kent Watsen' ; netmod@ietf.org Cc: 'Benoit Claise' ; 'Mahesh Jethanandani' Subj

Re: [netmod] file "ietf-...@2016-03-20.yang" or file "ietf-foo.yang"

On 3/24/2017 2:32 AM, Kent Watsen wrote: Hi Benoit, Section 4.2 of rfc6187bis says: The "" tag SHOULD be followed by a string identifying the file name specified in Section 5.2 of [RFC7950]. While Section 5.2 of RFC7950 says: The name of the file SHOULD be of the form:

[netmod] file "ietf-...@2016-03-20.yang" or file "ietf-foo.yang"

Dear all, [Preparing the IETF hackathon] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis#section-4.2 What is the guideline regarding: file "ietf-...@2016-03-20.yang" versus file "ietf-foo.yang" Right now, we have a mix of behaviors. This implies that the extract

Re: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-entity-03.txt

Tim, William, Are we good from a Broadband Forum point of view? I remember some discussions during the last IETF meeting regarding this entity YANG module. Regards, Benoit Hi, This version addresses the comments from Bart and Juergen. I think that this document is now ready for WGLC. /mar

[netmod] NETCONF/NETMOD charters and the revised-datastores draft

Dear all, The NETMOD chairs, the NETCONF chairs, and I had a call regarding draft-ietf-netmod-revised-datastores & charters. First of, we must stress that this piece of work is an essential building block in the world of data model-driven management. We also believe we have the right set of

Re: [netmod] draft netmod charter update proposal

Lou, In all my WGs, we consistently documented the intended status in the milestones, expressing the _intended _status at the time of the charter discussion Regards, Benoit Juergen, Thank you for the input. I think your point highlights how the technical contents of a document drives the

Re: [netmod] draft netmod charter update proposal

On 3/1/2017 9:40 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 04:56:12PM +, Kent Watsen wrote: Hi Lada, I understand your intention here, but I'm inclined to agree with others that it's better to stick with the term we're using in the documents. I'm open to the idea of changing

Re: [netmod] security considerations boilerplate updates to cover RESTCONF

Dear all, As discussed during the IESG telechat today, we should only focus on the addition of the RESTCONF bits, and not attempt to include the I2RS future protocol now. Hence this minimum change proposal: The YANG module defined in this document is designed to be accessed

Re: [netmod] security considerations boilerplate updates to cover RESTCONF

On 3/16/2017 8:56 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 08:37:39AM +0100, Benoit Claise wrote: Latest proposal: The YANG module defined in this document is designed to be accessed via network management protocols such as NETCONF [RFC6241] or RESTCONF [RFC8040

Re: [netmod] security considerations boilerplate updates to cover RESTCONF

On 3/16/2017 8:27 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 08:10:22PM +0100, Benoit Claise wrote: I like the "YANG based management protocols" part I think 'YANG based' is not needed (and to some extend even incorrect) and I would spell out 'netwo

Re: [netmod] security considerations boilerplate updates to cover RESTCONF

r-02#section-5) Thanks, Kent // contributor -ORIGINAL MESSAGE-- On 3/15/17, 12:45 PM, "netmod on behalf of Benoit Claise" mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org> on behalf of bcla...@cisco.com <mailto:bcla...@cisco.com>> wrote: Dear all, [copying the security ADs to make s

Re: [netmod] security considerations boilerplate updates to cover RESTCONF

Dear all, [copying the security ADs to make sure the new security section is fine] Let's separate the two issues 1. the multiple URLs in draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis-12.txt Basically, I agree with Jürgen I see section 4.7: This section MUST be patterned after the latest approved template

[netmod] Posting YANG modules: different tool chains, different results

Dear all, I've been spending much time the last days, running my scripts multiple times per day, and informing authors about errors/warnings from my reports . Let me hope it made a difference ! There

Re: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-entity-03.txt

Hi Martin, ietf-hardw...@2017-03-07.yang fails yanglint validation. See http://www.claise.be/IETFYANGPageCompilation.html Regards, Benoit Hi, This version addresses the comments from Bart and Juergen. I think that this document is now ready for WGLC. /martin internet-dra...@ietf.org wrote

[netmod] Toolchain upgraded to yanglint 0.12.116

Dear all, Radek released a new version of libyang and yanglint. See https://github.com/CESNET/libyang/releases/tag/v0.12-r1 The main features of this release are: * various bugfixes * support for YANG extensions (libyang's schema tree structures changed) * ietf-metadata implemented - suppo

Re: [netmod] Toolchain upgraded to yangdump-pro 16.10-5 => 16.10-5.1

Dear all, yangdump-pro upgraded to 16.10-5.1 The stats look better: http://claise.be/IETFYANGPageCompilation.png See http://www.claise.be/IETFYANGPageCompilation.html for the remaining open issues on your YANG modules. Still a week to improve them. Regards, Benoit Dear all, See http://www.cl

[netmod] Toolchain upgraded to yangdump-pro 16.10-5

Dear all, See http://www.claise.be/IETFYANGPageCompilation.html At least two bugs related to the IETF YANG modules are fixed. Please check your YANG modules. Regards, Benoit ___ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo

Re: [netmod] example modules in 6087bis

On 1/24/2017 8:26 PM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: Kent Watsen wrote: Hi Andy, I think this discussion has come to a head. Please submit an updated 6087bis as soon as you can. Some comments: 1) on the 3rd line below, should the text clarify that --ietf is only for IETF modules? Also, how doe

Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 (4916)

Dear all, This looks correct to me according to section 7.17.1 Need one more pair of eyes to double-check before approving. Regards, Benoit The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7950, "The YANG 1.1 Data Modeling Language". -- You may review t

Re: [netmod] example modules in 6087bis

On 1/18/2017 7:00 PM, Andy Bierman wrote: On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 9:12 AM, Benoit Claise <mailto:bcla...@cisco.com>> wrote: Martin, Hi, It turns out that the recommendations on example modules are a bit unclear. Different drafts do very different things. Some

Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6020 (4911) - what next?

Otherwise I like the text. Good. Errata approved. Regards, B. Lada Thanks, Rob On 23/01/2017 15:41, Benoit Claise wrote: On 1/23/2017 4:33 PM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: Benoit Claise wrote: On 1/23/2017 3:00 PM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: On 23 Jan 2017, at 14:39, Juergen Schoenwaelder

Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6020 (4911) - what next?

On 1/23/2017 4:33 PM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: Benoit Claise wrote: On 1/23/2017 3:00 PM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: On 23 Jan 2017, at 14:39, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 01:37:30PM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: Juergen Schoenwaelder writes: Benoit, RFC 6020 is

Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6020 (4911) - what next?

On 1/23/2017 3:00 PM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: On 23 Jan 2017, at 14:39, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 01:37:30PM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: Juergen Schoenwaelder writes: Benoit, RFC 6020 is ambiguous and this is just how it is. The solution for YANG 1 is simply to

Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6020 (4911) - what next?

modify the errata this way. Regards, Benoit This is backwards compatible. Making them illegal is not backwards compatible. /js PS: This is also my recollection of the discussion of issue Y06 when YANG 1.1 was put together. On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 11:29:25AM +0100, Benoit Claise wrote: Dear

Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6020 (4911) - what next?

Dear all, Let me summarize the situation. - The RFC 6020 spec is clearly ambiguous. - The solution is to use YANG 1.1 - RFC 7950 doesn't update or obsolete RFC 6020 (*) - We should stop this problem from spreading further: updating tooling is one good aspect, we should update the

Re: [netmod] example modules in 6087bis

Martin, Hi, It turns out that the recommendations on example modules are a bit unclear. Different drafts do very different things. Some examples: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l3-topology-08#section-6.1.2 This example module really looks like a real module. It uses an IAN

Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6020 (4911)

Removing RFC Editor See in-line. On 18 Jan 2017, at 14:55, Martin Bjorklund wrote: RFC Errata System wrote: The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6020, "YANG - A Data Modeling Language for the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)". --

Re: [netmod] The different YANG validators updated

On 1/4/2017 3:20 PM, Benoit Claise wrote: Dear all, At the last IETF hackathon, I included two new YANG validators on claise.be: yangdump-pro and yanglint Today, I updated the different validator versions. pyang: version 1.7.1 confdc/ version 5.10.4 this was actually confdc version

[netmod] The different YANG validators updated

Dear all, At the last IETF hackathon, I included two new YANG validators on claise.be: yangdump-pro and yanglint Today, I updated the different validator versions. pyang: version 1.7.1 confdc/ version 5.10.4 yangdump-pro: version 16.10-3 yanglint: version 0.11.94 Some of the YA

Re: [netmod] BBF work depending on draft-ietf-netmod-entity-01

On 12/15/2016 2:57 PM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: Benoit Claise wrote: Dear draft-ietf-netmod-entity authors, As mentioned by Tim Carey during the last IETF meeting, BBF work depends on the draft-ietf-netmod-entity-01. Message from BBF: We are now in the final stages of reviewing “TR-383

<    1   2   3   4   >