Re: [netmod] Recursive extensions?

Adding Yang Doctors to the thread. —Tom > On Oct 17, 2016:4:42 PM, at 4:42 PM, Robert Varga wrote: > > Hello everyone, > > neither RFC6020 nor RFC7950 seem to be explicit about this, so I thought > I'd ask. > > Are recursive, directly or transitively, extensions

Re: [netmod] opstate breakout report

Are there any meeting minutes (or IRC etc…) available for those that could not make it? —Tom > On Jul 26, 2016:12:20 PM, at 12:20 PM, Kent Watsen > wrote: > > All, > > We just wanted to update the WG on the break out meeting on updated > conceptual

Re: [netmod] Specifying revision date on import/include

> On Jul 16, 2016:7:17 PM, at 7:17 PM, William Lupton > wrote: > > All, > > RFC 6020bis has no recommendation re use of import/include revision-date but > makes it clear that if it’s omitted then the revision that will be used is > undefined (I believe that

Re: [netmod] Opstate solutions discussions: update and request for WG input

Lou, Given the wide-ranging impact of this sort of decision across not just the IETF, let me suggest that it might be a good idea to get data points from a sample that is a bit larger than 4 or 5. Forwarding this query to some other relevant WGs might be in order given the

Re: [netmod] Can you remove the "Identity acl-base" defined in draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-07

Yea, I agree that its probably worth giving a little more latitude when helping people with models. 8) —Tom > On May 10, 2016:12:55 PM, at 12:55 PM, Linda Dunbar > wrote: > > Juergen, > > Of course, it is not confusing to you because you are in

[netmod] secretary change

NETMOD WG: I regret to inform you that Andrew McLachlan has resigned as WG Secretary. He has had a number of recent changes that make it difficult for him to carry on in this role. The co-chairs with to thank him for his past service to the community, and wish him well going

Re: [netmod] draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model status

p in offline meeting. >> Will publish a new draft to address comments. Thanks, >> >> Lisa >> >> On 2/1/16, 8:01 AM, "netmod on behalf of Nadeau Thomas" >> <netmod-boun...@ietf.org on behalf of tnad...@lucidvision.com> wrote: >> >>>

Re: [netmod] Mini WG Last Call draft-ietf-netmod-yang-json-07

-chair) > On Jan 28, 2016:10:52 AM, at 10:52 AM, Nadeau Thomas > <tnad...@lucidvision.com> wrote: > > > This message is to officially begin a mini WG last call on > draft-ietf-netmod-yang-json-07. Lada had to make a number of changes to the > document based on

[netmod] draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model status

ACL Doc Authors: What is your status and plan to address the numerous technical comments that have arisen since the WG LC? I know there are for example, numerous detailed comments from Juergen and I think Elliot Lear posted some too. —Tom

[netmod] Mini WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-yang-metadata-03

This message is to officially begin a mini WG last call on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-metadata-03 Lada had to make a number of changes to the document based on feedback from the last call, and so the co-chairs felt that it was prudent to put this before the WG for a short LC period. I’d

[netmod] Mini WG Last Call draft-ietf-netmod-yang-json-07

This message is to officially begin a mini WG last call on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-json-07. Lada had to make a number of changes to the document based on feedback from the last call, and so the co-chairs felt that it was prudent to put this before the WG for a short LC period. I’d like

Re: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-opstate-reqs-04.txt

[Speaking as co-chair] Benoit, I believe the document is now ready for your AD review. —Tom > On Jan 22, 2016:8:37 PM, at 8:37 PM, Kent Watsen wrote: > > > [As a contributor] > > This update contains the following changes: > > > 1) removed

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

> On Jan 15, 2016:5:40 PM, at 5:40 PM, Kent Watsen wrote: > > > [As a contributor] > > > And just when I thought we were done with this draft ;) > > > > > > > >>> I think that the text for 2A would be more clear using MUST rather than >>> may (in the sense that a

Re: [netmod] New Thread: IESG Review Process for Yang Models at the IETF

> On Dec 22, 2015:10:36 AM, at 10:36 AM, Ladislav Lhotka <lho...@nic.cz> wrote: > > >> On 22 Dec 2015, at 16:22, Nadeau Thomas <tnad...@lucidvision.com> wrote: >> >> >> The action I am trying to tease out of this thread is how do we take &

Re: [netmod] module update rules

> On Dec 22, 2015:10:53 AM, at 10:53 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder > wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 04:23:44PM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: >> >>> On 22 Dec 2015, at 16:06, Juergen Schoenwaelder >>> wrote: >>> >>>

Re: [netmod] NETMOD WG LC: draft-ietf-netmod-opstate-reqs-01

> On Dec 22, 2015:6:38 AM, at 6:38 AM, Benoit Claise wrote: > > Jürgen, >> On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 06:47:49PM +0100, Benoit Claise wrote: >> >>> I hope that nobody disagrees that the operational state design and how >>> to structure the models are the two blocking factors to

Re: [netmod] module update rules

> On Dec 18, 2015:3:00 PM, at 3:00 PM, Andy Bierman <a...@yumaworks.com> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 11:49 AM, Nadeau Thomas <tnad...@lucidvision.com > <mailto:tnad...@lucidvision.com>> wrote: > >> On Dec 18, 2015:11:06 AM,

Re: [netmod] module update rules

> On Dec 18, 2015:11:06 AM, at 11:06 AM, Andy Bierman > wrote: > > > > On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 7:49 AM, Ladislav Lhotka > wrote: > Hi, > > if we want people to take YANG modules appearing in I-Ds seriously and > implement them,

Re: [netmod] Working group Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-06

s considered an ACL type that matches against a host > name. > > Eliot > > > On 12/9/15 5:27 PM, Nadeau Thomas wrote: >> This email initiates a NETMOD WG Last call for >> draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-06. >> Please review the draft and make any comments t

Re: [netmod] NETMOD WG LC: draft-ietf-netmod-opstate-reqs-01

> On Dec 17, 2015:9:36 AM, at 9:36 AM, Kent Watsen wrote: > > > > > > I’m struggling a bit to understand what is motivating you to ask this question.That is, as a tool vendor, I wouldn’t think that any decision made here would affect you

[netmod] NETMOD WG LC: draft-ietf-netmod-opstate-reqs-01

This is a WG Last Call on draft-ietf-netmod-opstate-reqs-01. Please post comments on this draft by Wednesday, December 30, 2015 at 9AM EST. Tom/Kent ___ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

Re: [netmod] call for consensus to adopt draft-entitydt-netmod-entity as NETMOD WG draft

> On Dec 16, 2015:3:55 AM, at 3:55 AM, Benoit Claise <bcla...@cisco.com> wrote: > > Dear all, >>> On 15 Dec 2015, at 13:34, Nadeau Thomas <tnad...@lucidvision.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>> NETMOD: >>> >>> The Br

[netmod] IPR Check: draft-ietf-netmod-opstate-reqs-01

This mail starts the IPR poll on draft-ietf-netmod-opstate-reqs-01. Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-ietf-netmod-opstate-reqs-01? If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details)? If you are listed as a

[netmod] NETMOD WG LC: draft-ietf-netmod-opstate-reqs-01

This is a WG Last Call on draft-ietf-netmod-opstate-reqs-01. Please post comments on this draft by Wednesday, December 30, 2015 at 9AM EST. Tom/Kent ___ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

Re: [netmod] IPR Check: draft-ietf-netmod-opstate-reqs-01

I have no nor know of any IPR Claims against this document. —Tom (speaking as an individual contributor) > On Dec 16, 2015:8:13 AM, at 8:13 AM, Nadeau Thomas <tnad...@lucidvision.com> > wrote: > > This mail starts the IPR poll on draft-ietf-netm

[netmod] call for consensus to adopt draft-entitydt-netmod-entity as NETMOD WG draft

NETMOD: The Broadband Forum and the members of the design team who worked on the IETF Entity module have asked that the working group considerthe ietf-entity YANG module (currently https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-entitydt-netmod-entity/ which is still in individual draft

[netmod] IPR Check: draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-06

This mail starts the IPR poll on draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-06. Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-06? If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details)? If you are listed as a document

[netmod] Working group Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-06

This email initiates a NETMOD WG Last call for draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-06. Please review the draft and make any comments to the list by Wednesday, 16 December, 2015 by 8AM EST. Tom and Kent (as NETMOD Co-chairs) ___ netmod

Re: [netmod] draft netmod 94 minutes posted

It doesn't work for me either. I’ll file a case with the support folks to take a look. —Tom > On Nov 24, 2015:9:22 AM, at 9:22 AM, Robert Wilton wrote: > > Hi Kent, Andrew > > Do you have a pointer to the recordings please? I tried the audio streams on >

Re: [netmod] Is there an interim WG meeting today?

There is none. We are not allowed to have them this close to the IETF meeting. —Tom Sent from my Apple ][ > On Oct 29, 2015:10:42 AM, at 10:42 AM, Robert Wilton > wrote: > > Hi, > > Just to check, I presume that there is no interim WG meeting today

Re: [netmod] review of draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis-08.txt

> On Oct 27, 2015:1:51 PM, at 1:51 PM, Andy Bierman wrote: > > Hi, > > Here are my review comments on YANG 1.1. > IMO the document is almost ready for publication. What remains before it is ready? —Tom > I plan to implement YANG 1.1 in YumaPro tools

Re: [netmod] review of draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis-08.txt

man <a...@yumaworks.com> > wrote: > > > > On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 4:55 AM, Nadeau Thomas <tnad...@lucidvision.com > <mailto:tnad...@lucidvision.com>> wrote: > > > > On Oct 27, 2015:1:51 PM, at 1:51 PM, Andy Bierman <a...@yumaworks.c

Re: [netmod] interim meeting NEW webex

Webex hung up on us again. Please rejoin using the same URL. —Tom > On Oct 15, 2015:10:20 AM, at 10:20 AM, Nadeau Thomas > <tnad...@lucidvision.com> wrote: > > Some (including me) were having issues with “computer audio”. If you > are, call into m

[netmod] interim meeting NEW webex

Apologies but the WebEx unexpectedly terminated. I’ve started a new one here: https://ietf.webex.com/meet/netmod Please join there if you were on the call or want to join the interim meeting. —Tom ___ netmod

Re: [netmod] interim meeting NEW webex

I just unlocked it. Audio should work now. > On Oct 15, 2015:10:16 AM, at 10:16 AM, Mahesh Jethanandani > <mjethanand...@gmail.com> wrote: > > This one says the meeting is locked and one cannot join. > >> On Oct 15, 2015, at 7:12 AM, Nadeau Thom

Re: [netmod] interim meeting NEW webex

g > <mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org>] On Behalf Of Mahesh Jethanandani > Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2015 5:16 PM > To: Nadeau Thomas > Cc: netmod WG > Subject: Re: [netmod] interim meeting NEW webex > > This one says the meeting is locked and one cannot join

[netmod] IPR Poll for draft-ietf-netmod-yang-metadata-02

NETMOD WG: This mail starts the IPR poll on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-metadata-02. Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-ietf-netmod-yang-metadata-02? If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details). If you are

[netmod] Consensus to Adoption of draft-chairs-netmod-opstate-reqs-00 as a NETMOD WG Document

NETMOD WG: After much discussion, The Chairs believe there is rough consensus to move forward and adopt the base requirements as listed in draft-chairs-netmod-opstate-reqs-00. We therefore believe it is appropriate now to adopt draft-chairs-netmod-opstate-reqs-00 as a NETMOD

Re: [netmod] Thursday Interim Meeting Agenda

AM, at 10:54 AM, Nadeau Thomas > <tnad...@lucidvision.com> wrote: > > > After discussing a bit more with Kent, we wanted to slightly amend > the agenda for tomorrow to first start out with trying to wrap up the > discussion around the requirements.

Re: [netmod] Thursday Interim Meeting Agenda

about the open issues: https://github.com/netmod-wg/opstate-reqs/issues —Tom > On Sep 29, 2015:3:53 PM, at 3:53 PM, Nadeau Thomas <tnad...@lucidvision.com> > wrote: > > > After going over the plan with Kent, we would like to continue the > agenda from th

Re: [netmod] Preliminary Meeting Minutes from Interim Meeting 9/10/2015

Thanks, > Rob > > > On 10/09/2015 21:57, Nadeau Thomas wrote: >> >> These are the preliminary/draft meeting minutes from today’s meeting. >> They will be neatened up once we are sure what they contain is accurate. >> Please >> comment ASAP if you

Re: [netmod] Consensus Call Note for Requirements

[Sorry for not raising them in the meeting yesterday, but we had > already spent a lot of time discussing the requirements and I also think that > you understandably went through the options quite fast at the end]. > > On 10/09/2015 21:44, Nadeau Thomas wrote: >> This is an off

Re: [netmod] WebEx meeting invitation: NETMOD Interm meeting on OpenConfig: tomorrow meeting

> On Sep 10, 2015:8:26 AM, at 8:26 AM, Lou Berger <lber...@labn.net> wrote: > > I think another question is if the current *requirements* text good /close > enough for a -00 wg document > > Lou > > > On September 10, 2015 8:20:34 AM Nadeau Thomas &

Re: [netmod] Tomorrow's Interim Meeting Details

scope. > IMO it would be useful to know if the scope includes all YANG modules, only > IETF > YANG modules, or perhaps only IETF routing modules. As the scope gets wider, > the probability that "1 size fits all" goes way down. > > > Andy > > > On Wed, S

Re: [netmod] WebEx meeting invitation: NETMOD Interm meeting on OpenConfig: tomorrow meeting

> On Sep 10, 2015:2:32 AM, at 2:32 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder > wrote: > > Yes, in my view, section 4.5 goes a bit too far in making a certain > solution part of the requirement. > > The solutions that have been written up have different properties in >

Re: [netmod] Tomorrow's Interim Meeting Details

https://ietf.webex.com/ietf/j.php?MTID=m66838a52ebff4cf2879dff9b01f30f44 > On Sep 10, 2015:11:01 AM, at 11:01 AM, Martin Bjorklund <m...@tail-f.com> > wrote: > > Hi, > > I got this, but there is no url to the webex there. Can you send the > url? > > > &

[netmod] Consensus Call Note for Requirements

This is an official NETMOD working group call for consensus around the requirements referenced below and discussed in detail at the interim meeting held Thursday, September 10, 2015. At that meeting, the chairs went over each requirement in detail and called for any objections to each

[netmod] Tomorrow's Interim Meeting Details

I wanted to set things up for the interim meeting tomorrow. To frame the meeting, we want to achieve two main goals: 1) close on requirements around a requirement to define a structure for IETF models and the requirements around ops state/models 2)

Re: [netmod] minutes of the NETMOD 2015-08-31 virtual interim meeting

> On Sep 8, 2015:10:11 AM, at 10:11 AM, Kent Watsen wrote: > > > > On 9/7/15, 3:31 AM, "Martin Bjorklund" wrote: > >> Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: >>> On Fri, Sep 04, 2015 at 09:29:53AM -0700, Andy Bierman wrote:

Re: [netmod] tracking new YANG language issues

> On Sep 1, 2015:1:58 PM, at 1:58 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder > wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 06:45:55PM +0100, Giles Heron wrote: >> On 1 Sep 2015, at 18:30, Juergen Schoenwaelder >> wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, Sep

Re: [netmod] Motivations for Structuring Models

On Aug 27, 2015:1:59 PM, at 1:59 PM, Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote: On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 10:39 AM, Rob Shakir r...@rob.sh mailto:r...@rob.sh wrote: Andy, Apologies, I don’t understand how your mail answers the questions that I posed. On August 27, 2015 at 12:25:20,

Re: [netmod] Motivations for Structuring Models

On Aug 27, 2015:2:29 PM, at 2:29 PM, Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote: On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 11:14 AM, Nadeau Thomas tnad...@lucidvision.com mailto:tnad...@lucidvision.com wrote: On Aug 27, 2015:1:59 PM, at 1:59 PM, Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com mailto:a...@yumaworks.com

Re: [netmod] questions about draft-rtgyangdt-rtgwg-device-model-00

On Aug 26, 2015:5:51 AM, at 5:51 AM, Lou Berger lber...@labn.net wrote: On August 26, 2015 2:42:26 AM Juergen Schoenwaelder j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de wrote: On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 10:53:55PM -0400, Lou Berger wrote: Hopefully, a decision to change all existing models

Re: [netmod] questions about draft-rtgyangdt-rtgwg-device-model-00

On Aug 26, 2015:6:26 AM, at 6:26 AM, Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com wrote: Acee Lindem (acee) a...@cisco.com wrote: On 8/26/15, 2:40 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de wrote: On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 10:53:55PM -0400, Lou Berger wrote: Hopefully, a

Re: [netmod] questions about draft-rtgyangdt-rtgwg-device-model-00

On Aug 26, 2015:9:09 AM, at 9:09 AM, Acee Lindem (acee) a...@cisco.com wrote: On 8/26/15, 8:09 AM, Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com wrote: Nadeau Thomas tnad...@lucidvision.com wrote: On Aug 26, 2015:6:26 AM, at 6:26 AM, Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com wrote: Acee Lindem

Re: [netmod] questions about draft-rtgyangdt-rtgwg-device-model-00

On Aug 26, 2015:10:51 AM, at 10:51 AM, Kent Watsen kwat...@juniper.net wrote: Another approach is to not rely so heavily on one giant uber-tree that MUST be correct on the first try and never change. I agree that an uber tree stands to make things worse. This seems to

Re: [netmod] questions about draft-rtgyangdt-rtgwg-device-model-00

On Aug 19, 2015:10:31 PM, at 10:31 PM, Lou Berger lber...@labn.net wrote: On 08/19/2015 08:48 AM, Nadeau Thomas wrote: On Aug 18, 2015:9:38 PM, at 9:38 PM, Lou Berger lber...@labn.net wrote: [Adding authors and RTG WG.] Hi Andy, I'm not sure who you are looking to hear from as you

Re: [netmod] extensions and conformance

On Aug 20, 2015:10:30 AM, at 10:30 AM, Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote: On 20 Aug 2015, at 16:00, Nadeau Thomas tnad...@lucidvision.com wrote: On Aug 20, 2015:9:26 AM, at 9:26 AM, Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com wrote: Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote: Martin Bjorklund m

Re: [netmod] WebEx meeting invitation: NETMOD Interm meeting on OpenConfig

On Aug 13, 2015:4:32 PM, at 4:32 PM, Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote: On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 1:14 PM, Nadeau Thomas tnad...@lucidvision.com mailto:tnad...@lucidvision.com wrote: On Aug 13, 2015:4:03 PM, at 4:03 PM, Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com mailto:a...@yumaworks.com

[netmod] Interim Meeting Minutes June 25, 2015

These are the preliminary notes from the interim meeting on June 25, 2015. I am still awaiting notes from Ignas who also took meeting minutes before I post the official minutes. If there are any comments/corrections to what I have below, please post here as soon as possible.

[netmod] Open Config Options

One of the actions from the last Interim meeting was to have both sides of the issues around the open config approach to create at least slides/textual bullet points for use during our discussion in Praha so we can come to a conclusion around the final issues. We need these

[netmod] Initial IEEE Yang Models Committed

FYI, There was discussion of IEEE/Ethernet models a while back. I wanted to let everyone know that an initial one was just pushed. https://github.com/YangModels/yang/tree/master/experimental/ieee —Tom ___

[netmod] draft meeting minutes from Interim meeting on June 18, 2015

These are the draft meeting minutes from Interim meeting on June 18, 2015. Please comment. If I don’t hear from anyone by Friday, they will be published as-is. —Tom NETMOD Virtual Interim Meeting (June 18, 2015) * Participants - Acee - Ambika Prasad Tripathy - Andy

[netmod] Action from Today's Interim Meeting

First, can the folks that presented slides today (Acee and Anees) please send their slides to the list here. Preferred mode is a URL to a place where the slides exist so we don’t fill everyones’ boxes with PPTs. 8) Also, we need at least one person to try to document