Re: [netmod] Y34 - root node

- Original Message - From: Jonathan Hansford jonat...@hansfords.net cc: NETMOD Working Group netmod@ietf.org Sent: Monday, August 10, 2015 9:46 AM And it is not just end users who need help to better understand YANG models and how to use them. For those still on the edge, looking to

Re: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model-08.txt

Tom Petch - Original Message - From: "Sterne, Jason (Nokia - CA)" Sent: Friday, May 27, 2016 8:30 PM > Hi Clyde, > > I was a bit surprised to see the receiver/server side config in here (log-input-transports). That seems to be a somewhat significant change in

Re: [netmod] leafref value space and constraint

- Original Message - From: "Martin Bjorklund" To: Sent: Monday, May 23, 2016 3:10 PM > > This comment from the Gen-ART review deserves it's own thread. > > gen-art> - section 9.9 > gen-art> > gen-art>The leafref type is used to declare a constraint

Re: [netmod] Protocol Action: 'The YANG 1.1 Data Modeling Language' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis-14.txt)

Martin Is there any changelog available for the last four versions? The log I see stops at -10. Tom Petch - Original Message - From: "Ladislav Lhotka" To: "Andy Bierman" Cc: Sent: Monday, June 20, 2016 6:58 AM Subject: Re:

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

Lou You say below " > It's just a ro version/view of the config data. I'm not sure why this > is problematic. Perhaps I'm just missing something. " I see it as a fundamental change (to NETCONF). Tracking other lists (e.g.I2RS) I repeatedly get the sense that they have not grasped what

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

Lou By now, 17th June, I see solid support for one option but only see comments from a somewhat small number of participants The majority of the authors of the 172 YANG files I have in an archive are probably unaware of this discussion and yet some at least will be affected. What concerns me is

Re: [netmod] 6087bis namespace recommendations

- Original Message - From: "Juergen Schoenwaelder" To: "Martin Bjorklund" Cc: Sent: Monday, January 11, 2016 10:48 AM > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 11:21:43AM +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > Juergen Schoenwaelder

Re: [netmod] Fwd: Re: [Rtg-dt-yang-arch] I-D Action: draft-rtgyangdt-rtgwg-device-model-03.txt

- Original Message - From: "Juergen Schoenwaelder" To: "Benoit Claise" Cc: ; "NETMOD Working Group" Sent: Friday, March 04, 2016 10:33 AM Subject: Re: [netmod] Fwd: Re:

[netmod] features - a Cartesian explosion

One of my comments on syslog was that it had 10 features. Assuming that each can be present or absent, that would seem to allow over 1000 different possible implementations, almost all of which will likely never be seen in the field. And yet, if there are 1000 possible implementations, does not

Re: [netmod] draft-bjorklund-netmod-structural-mount / possible simplification

- Original Message - From: "Juergen Schoenwaelder" Sent: Friday, March 04, 2016 4:52 PM > On Fri, Mar 04, 2016 at 04:25:37PM +, STUART VENTERS wrote: > > > > 2) Allow the 'rpc' and 'notification' nouns to be used in other places in the

[netmod] action and mandatory node

Given container... list... action with the usual twiddly brackets, and a separate mandatory data node alongside the list in the top level container, is there a requirement to include that mandatory data node in the XML RPC? 6020bis s.7.15.2 says " The "action" element contains an hierarchy of

Re: [netmod] draft-bjorklund-netmod-structural-mount / possible simplification

ssage- > From: Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de] > Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2016 9:08 AM > To: t. petch > Cc: STUART VENTERS; netmod@ietf.org; Martin Bjorklund > Subject: Re: [netmod] draft-bjorklund-netmod-structural-mount / possible simplifica

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model-06

I have reviewed this and do not believe it is ready for publication. - draft appears in several places - TBD occurs in one - it would seem that there are two modules in this I-D but only one is registered in s.7 - in s.7 I read prefix: syslog reference: which I found odd - ah, it means

Re: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model-07.txt

- Original Message - From: "Clyde Wildes (cwildes)" To: Cc: "Martin Bjorklund" ; "t.petch" ; "Kiran Koushik Agrahara Sreenivasa (kkoushik)" Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2016 7:53 PM > Hi, > > This

Re: [netmod] call for consensus to adopt draft-wilton-netmod-intf-ext-yang as NETMOD WG draft

Kent Has there been any progress in the IEEE on their work to produce Ethernet related models, as was mentioned earlier on in this thread? Tom Petch - Original Message - From: "Kent Watsen" To: Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2016 4:18 PM Subject: Re:

Re: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model-07.txt

Clyde Weeell; I still think that we may regret having so many features and so many possible combinations; For me, it is not a question of whether they are there in the wild but whether it is right to have such a complex model; a bit like ABNF where all sorts of things are possible but sometimes

[netmod] datastores Re: AD review draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis-11 (part 1)

I see that the definition of 'datastores' has cropped up in this AD Review, as in the e-mail below. Meanwhile, draft-ietf-i2rs-pub-sub-requirements-05.txt is in IETF Last Call and redefines, or recreates, the term for us A YANG datastore is a conceptual datastore that contains hierarchical

Re: [netmod] example modules in 6087bis-10

I don't understand! - s.4.2 "The following example is for the '2010-01-18' revision of the 'ietf-foo' module: " compared with " revision 2016-03-20 { description "Latest revision"; reference "RFC "; " and I would add an RFC Editor note for to replace with the number of this RFC

Re: [netmod] draft netmod charter update proposal

- Original Message - From: "Juergen Schoenwaelder" Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2017 9:46 AM > On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 09:32:37AM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > > > > > So are we going through all NETMOD/NETCONF documents now to replace > > >

[netmod] draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model-12

The explanation of the YANG tree diagram is not that in RFC6087; I think that it should be (or else explain why not) I am confused by the variation in the references to RFC in the modules. I see RFC 5424 [RFC5426] RFC5424 I think the first correct Tom Petch - Original Message - From:

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

- Original Message - From: "Martin Bjorklund" To: Cc: ; Sent: Friday, March 24, 2017 1:44 PM > Robert Wilton wrote: > > > > > > On 24/03/2017 08:09, Benoit Claise wrote: > > > On 3/24/2017 2:32

Re: [netmod] Interaction of 'when' and 'default' statements

- Original Message - From: "Phil Shafer" Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2017 8:24 PM > William Ivory writes: > >Yes, I'd noticed that. Does this make the behaviour 'undefined' in YANG 1.0? > > No, this was a clarification. The text in 6020 was reasonably clear: > >The

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

- Original Message - From: "Andy Bierman" Sent: Friday, March 24, 2017 6:07 PM > On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 6:44 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > > Robert Wilton wrote: > > > On 24/03/2017 08:09, Benoit Claise wrote: > > > > On

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

- Original Message - From: "Andy Bierman" Sent: Friday, March 24, 2017 6:07 PM > On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 6:44 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > > Robert Wilton wrote: > > > > > > > > > On 24/03/2017 08:09, Benoit Claise wrote: > >

Re: [netmod] draft netmod charter update proposal

- Original Message - From: "Ladislav Lhotka" To: "Robert Wilton" Cc: Sent: Friday, March 17, 2017 2:32 PM > > > On 17 Mar 2017, at 15:04, Robert Wilton wrote: > > > > Would 7950bis be allowed to have a normative

Re: [netmod] draft netmod charter update proposal

- Original Message - From: "Robert Wilton" Sent: Friday, March 17, 2017 2:04 PM > > Would 7950bis be allowed to have a normative reference to an > Informational RFC that defined the YANG datastores? No but yes but ... The rules say no but the exception is that the

Re: [netmod] draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model-12

- Original Message - From: "Clyde Wildes (cwildes)" Sent: Monday, March 13, 2017 6:11 PM > Tom, > > The next revision of the draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model includes a change to the Yang tree diagram explanation to include the text from RFC6087bis. > > RFC5426 is

Re: [netmod] stable reference for tree diagram notation

Original Message - From: "Andy Bierman" To: "Kent Watsen" Cc: Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2017 7:14 PM > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 10:56 AM, Kent Watsen wrote: > > > > I think we can allow both and leave it to

Re: [netmod] draft netmod charter update proposal

The NETCONF list has also been discussing a charter update, as some of you will know, and part of that consists of taking into a NETCONF I-D parts of RFC7950. I see a joint agreement as to just which bits of RFC7950 will be elided as the starting point for this (followed by a revision of