;
NetMod WG ; RFC Errata System
Subject: Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8342 (5514)
> After reading the RFC details, it seems that the example is intentional based
> on
> the text about NP-containers.
>
> I think an errata could be used because the sentence about a t
> After reading the RFC details, it seems that the example is intentional based
> on
> the text about NP-containers.
>
> I think an errata could be used because the sentence about a top-level origin
> must be defined
> could be interpreted to define "top-level" as the topmost level for which
On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 9:03 AM, Lou Berger wrote:
>
>
> On 10/8/2018 10:13 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Oct 08, 2018 at 08:57:33AM -0400, Lou Berger wrote:
>>
>>> I think it's clear that the reviewers, notably myself as shepherd, missed
>>> that this is a lowercase "must" and
Hi Rob,
On 10/8/2018 9:51 AM, Robert Wilton wrote:
Hi Lou,
On 08/10/2018 13:57, Lou Berger wrote:
Hi Rob/All,
Keep in mind that the document says what it says and that to change
text really requires a new version.
On 10/8/2018 6:01 AM, Robert Wilton wrote:
So there seem to be two
On 10/8/2018 10:13 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
On Mon, Oct 08, 2018 at 08:57:33AM -0400, Lou Berger wrote:
I think it's clear that the reviewers, notably myself as shepherd, missed
that this is a lowercase "must" and should have asked for clarification
during the review process.
Having
On Mon, Oct 08, 2018 at 08:57:33AM -0400, Lou Berger wrote:
>
> I think it's clear that the reviewers, notably myself as shepherd, missed
> that this is a lowercase "must" and should have asked for clarification
> during the review process.
>
> Having an errata saying this "must" really is a
Hi Lou,
On 08/10/2018 13:57, Lou Berger wrote:
Hi Rob/All,
Keep in mind that the document says what it says and that to change
text really requires a new version.
On 10/8/2018 6:01 AM, Robert Wilton wrote:
So there seem to be two available solutions here:
(i) The server MUST provide an
Hi Rob/All,
Keep in mind that the document says what it says and that to change text
really requires a new version.
On 10/8/2018 6:01 AM, Robert Wilton wrote:
So there seem to be two available solutions here:
(i) The server MUST provide an origin value for the top level datanode,
This is
So there seem to be two available solutions here:
(i) The server MUST provide an origin value for the top level datanode,
but for NP containers it can use whatever origin value it likes - since
the origin value imparts no direct meaning other than the default origin
that descendants acquire
On Sat, Oct 6, 2018 at 11:47 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder <
j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 05, 2018 at 09:53:32AM -0700, Andy Bierman wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 9:12 AM, Lou Berger wrote:
> >
> > > My personal opinion (with any hat on) is that it isn't appropriate
On Fri, Oct 05, 2018 at 09:53:32AM -0700, Andy Bierman wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 9:12 AM, Lou Berger wrote:
>
> > My personal opinion (with any hat on) is that it isn't appropriate to make
> > a technical change that impacts implementation in an errata.
> > Clarifications of original
On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 9:12 AM, Lou Berger wrote:
> My personal opinion (with any hat on) is that it isn't appropriate to make
> a technical change that impacts implementation in an errata.
> Clarifications of original intent, corrections of inconsistencies and
> editorial corrections are
My personal opinion (with any hat on) is that it isn't appropriate to
make a technical change that impacts implementation in an errata.
Clarifications of original intent, corrections of inconsistencies and
editorial corrections are perfectly appropriate. I'm happy to learn
that this intended
Well, if you think an errata does not work, we can file a one page
document with N pages of boilerplate around it.
/js
On Fri, Oct 05, 2018 at 08:14:33AM -0400, Lou Berger wrote:
> Juergen,
>
> The document says what it says, i.e., "The origin for any top-level
> configuration data nodes
Juergen,
The document says what it says, i.e., "The origin for any top-level
configuration data nodes must be specified." Changes to this would
require a BIS or an RFC that updates this document.
Lou
On 10/5/2018 6:14 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
Hi,
the authors have been
Hi,
the authors have been discussing whether the top-level requirement is
too strict but there has not been a clear conclusion yet I think. In
the example, all nodes to have a defined origin and hence the origin
at the root will have zero effect.
/js
On Fri, Oct 05, 2018 at 02:48:08AM -0700,
The following errata report has been submitted for RFC8342,
"Network Management Datastore Architecture (NMDA)".
--
You may review the report below and at:
http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5514
--
Type: Technical
Reported
17 matches
Mail list logo
