Re: [netmod] Does YANG allow forward references to groupings?

William Ivory wrote: > Hi, > > I'd appreciate clarification on whether a YANG grouping defined and > used in the same file must have the grouping definition first, before > the 'uses' statement. > > On the one hand, RFC 6020 section 7.11 states: 'Once a grouping is >

[netmod] Does YANG allow forward references to groupings?

Hi, I'd appreciate clarification on whether a YANG grouping defined and used in the same file must have the grouping definition first, before the 'uses' statement. On the one hand, RFC 6020 section 7.11 states: 'Once a grouping is defined, it can be referenced in a "uses" statement',

[netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-intf-ext-yang-03.txt

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the NETCONF Data Modeling Language of the IETF. Title : Common Interface Extension YANG Data Models Authors : Robert Wilton

Re: [netmod] New Version Notification for draft-sharma-netmod-fault-model-01.txt

Hi, A new version of "draft-sharma-netmod-fault-model-01” has been uploaded. In this version we have incorporated comments that we received on version "00". Please review the new version and let us know your comments. We will also discuss with Martin and Stefan best path forward for

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-09 (until Oct 27, 2016)

And Cisco being the other vendor to have implemented the model. > On Oct 27, 2016, at 6:55 AM, Dean Bogdanovic wrote: > > Paul, > > I apologize. Volta Networks implemented the draft. > > Dean > >> On Oct 27, 2016, at 9:52 AM, Doolan, Paul (Coriant - US/Irving) >>

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-09 (until Oct 27, 2016)

Yes/support Cheers, Jeff This is a notice to start a two-week NETMOD WG last call for the document: Network Access Control List (ACL) YANG Data Model https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-09 Please indicate your support

Re: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-intf-ext-yang-02.txt

Hi William, Thanks! I'll fix these and re-post. Regards, Rob On 27/10/2016 15:22, William Lupton wrote: Rob, all, Please note that the ietf-interfaces-common tree doesn’t seem to match the YANG (at least as far as features are concerned). Also I noticed that the module names are reported

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-09 (until Oct 27, 2016)

I support this draft publication and we have implemented this draft, so there is another vendor implementation. Dean > On Oct 14, 2016, at 11:13 PM, Mahesh Jethanandani > wrote: > > I have reviewed this draft and support its publication. We have implemented > the

[netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-intf-ext-yang-02.txt

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the NETCONF Data Modeling Language of the IETF. Title : Common Interface Extension YANG Data Models Authors : Robert Wilton

Re: [netmod] Does YANG allow forward references to groupings?

Thanks for confirming, William -Original Message- From: Martin Bjorklund [mailto:m...@tail-f.com] Sent: 27 October 2016 12:09 To: William Ivory Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] Does YANG allow forward references to groupings? William Ivory

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-09 (until Oct 27, 2016)

Not sure if there's explicit IETF rules on this and I know we're all individual contributors but, as a courtesy, will people claiming implementations and using a non company email domain (e.g @gmail.com) indicate which organization it is that's done the implementing. thanks,

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-09 (until Oct 27, 2016)

Paul, I apologize. Volta Networks implemented the draft. Dean > On Oct 27, 2016, at 9:52 AM, Doolan, Paul (Coriant - US/Irving) > wrote: > > Not sure if there's explicit IETF rules on this and I know we're all > individual contributors but, as a courtesy, will

Re: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-intf-ext-yang-02.txt

Rob, all, Please note that the ietf-interfaces-common tree doesn’t seem to match the YANG (at least as far as features are concerned). Also I noticed that the module names are reported (at least once) in the draft as interface-extensions and etherlike-interfaces, whereas they are now