[netmod] Some comments on yang tree diagrams

Hi Authors, I have read this draft and think it is very useful. However, IMHO, there are also something need to improved. For example: # In section2 Tree Diagram Syntax, it describes " ! for a presence container", but in some draft/ RFC the container not be marked by "!", for example "ietf-int

Re: [netmod] Some comments on yang tree diagrams

Hi Michael, On 6/19/17, 3:20 AM, "netmod on behalf of wangzitao" wrote: >Hi Authors, > >I have read this draft and think it is very useful. However, IMHO, there >are also something need to improved. For example: ># In section2 Tree Diagram Syntax, it describes " ! for a presence >container", b

Re: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis-13.txt

Hi, This draft addresses all remaining open issues, include the rewrite of the opstate section. I think it is ready for another quick WGLC and then back to the IESG. Andy On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 9:54 PM, wrote: > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > director

Re: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis-13.txt

Andy Bierman writes: >This draft addresses all remaining open issues, include the rewrite of the >opstate section. >>In YANG, any data that has a "config" statement value of "false" >>could be considered operational data. The relationship between >>configuration (i.e., "config" statement