[netmod] Document Action: 'YANG Module Classification' to Informational RFC (draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-08.txt)

The IESG has approved the following document: - 'YANG Module Classification' (draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-08.txt) as Informational RFC This document is the product of the NETCONF Data Modeling Language Working Group. The IESG contact persons are Warren Kumari and Benoit Claise

[netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-08.txt

Carl Moberg Filename: draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-08.txt Pages : 11 Date: 2017-06-13 Abstract: The YANG data modeling language is currently being considered for a wide variety of applications

Re: [netmod] Deborah Brungard's Yes on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-07: (with COMMENT)

> Alliteratively, I propose to remove MEF from the list of examples. > > Regards, Benoit [deborah] Sounds good- Deborah > > > > > > . > > ___ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

[netmod] Deborah Brungard's Yes on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-07: (with COMMENT)

Deborah Brungard has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-07: Yes When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however

Re: [netmod] [Gen-art] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-07

ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>. > > Document: draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-07 > Reviewer: Pete Resnick > Review Date: 2017-05-22 > IETF LC End Date: 2017-05-14 > IESG Telechat date: 2017-06-08 > > Summary: Ready > > Major issues: None > &

[netmod] Deborah Brungard's Yes on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-07: (with COMMENT)

Deborah Brungard has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-07: Yes When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however

Re: [netmod] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-07: (with COMMENT)

Thanks for the response. Also in-line: > On Jun 7, 2017, at 8:50 AM, Benoit Claise <bcla...@cisco.com> wrote: > > Hi Ben, > > Thanks for your review. See in-line. >> Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for >> draft-ietf-netmod-yang-mode

Re: [netmod] Alia Atlas' Yes on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-07: (with COMMENT)

il.com <mailto:akat...@gmail.com>> wrote: Alia Atlas has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-07: Yes When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (

Re: [netmod] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-07: (with COMMENT)

On 6/7/2017 12:13 AM, Adam Roach wrote: Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-07: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut

Re: [netmod] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-07: (with COMMENT)

Hi Ben, Thanks for your review. See in-line. Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-07: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free

Re: [netmod] Alia Atlas' Yes on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-07: (with COMMENT)

Module pedigree seems good. Other alternatives might be "module ownership" or "module origin" On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 9:30 PM, Alia Atlas <akat...@gmail.com> wrote: > Alia Atlas has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model

[netmod] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-07: (with COMMENT)

Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-07: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however

[netmod] Alia Atlas' Yes on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-07: (with COMMENT)

Alia Atlas has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-07: Yes When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please

[netmod] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-07: (with COMMENT)

Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-07: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however

[netmod] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-07

of the draft. For more information, please see the FAQ at <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-07 Reviewer: Pete Resnick Review Date: 2017-05-22 IETF LC End Date: 2017-05-14 IESG Telechat date: 2017-06-08 Summary: Ready

Re: [netmod] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-06

Thanks Pete, Version 7 has been posted. All your feedback has been taken into account. https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-07 Regards, Benoit Reviewer: Pete Resnick Review result: Ready with Issues I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft

[netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-07.txt

Carl Moberg Filename: draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-07.txt Pages : 11 Date: 2017-05-16 Abstract: The YANG data modeling language is currently being considered for a wide variety of applications

[netmod] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-06

. For more information, please see the FAQ at <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-?? Reviewer: Pete Resnick Review Date: 2017-05-09 IETF LC End Date: 2017-05-14 IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat Summary: Ready with

[netmod] Fwd: Publication has been requested for draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-06

uested for draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-06 To: bcla...@cisco.com CC: netmod-cha...@ietf.org, lber...@labn.net, iesg-secret...@ietf.org, Lou Berger <lber...@labn.net> Lou Berger has requested publication of draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-06 as Informational on behalf o

Re: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-06.txt

anovic Benoit Claise Carl Moberg Filename: draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-06.txt Pages : 11 Date: 2017-04-27 Abstract: The YANG data modeling language is currently being considered for a

Re: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-06.txt

; Filename : draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-06.txt > Pages : 11 > Date: 2017-04-27 > > Abstract: > The YANG data modeling language is currently being considered for a > wide variety of applications throughout the netw

[netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-06.txt

Carl Moberg Filename: draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-06.txt Pages : 11 Date: 2017-04-27 Abstract: The YANG data modeling language is currently being considered for a wide variety of applications

[netmod] Progress of draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification and draft-wu-opsawg-service-model-explained

Hi, As just stated at the mic in the OPS Area meeting, I met with Dean Bogdanovic today to discuss the overlap/underlap between these two drafts. 1. We went through the text changes to draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification and I am happy that changes in the -05 revision address

[netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-05.txt

Carl Moberg Filename: draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-05.txt Pages : 11 Date: 2017-03-13 Abstract: The YANG data modeling language is currently being considered for a wide variety of applications

Re: [netmod] Question on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification

odule" is a term we invented > to match the definition in draft-wu-opsawg-service-model-explained: I don't > think the term is used anywhere else, so maybe a better question is "is this > a useful/meaningful term?" > > If the answer to Q1 is that draft-wu-opsawg-servi

Re: [netmod] Question on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification

Hi Adrian and Tianran, > On Feb 14, 2017, at 5:23 AM, Adrian Farrel <adr...@olddog.co.uk> wrote: > > Hi Tianran, > > Nice summary. > > I think some of the confusion may be that > draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification shows "Network Service YANG >

Re: [netmod] Question on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification

Hi Tianran, Nice summary. I think some of the confusion may be that draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification shows "Network Service YANG Modules" on the interface between OSS/BSS and the network. But the "customer service model" is at a different place in the hierarchy

Re: [netmod] [OPSAWG] Question on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification

I would prefer to have all terms people find agreement on in a single document. /js On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 09:54:10AM +, Tianran Zhou wrote: > Hi, > > Based on the discussion, here I try to clean up the confusion of the two I-Ds. > > [draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model

Re: [netmod] Question on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification

Hi, Based on the discussion, here I try to clean up the confusion of the two I-Ds. [draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification] classifies the yang modules into "Network Service YANG Module" and the "Network Element YANG Module". And usually, it uses "service modu

Re: [netmod] Question on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification

ce-model-explained is >>> consistent with the latest version of >>> draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification. In discussions with Tianran a >>> question has come up. >>> >>> In section 2 you have a nice definition of Network Service YANG Modules

Re: [netmod] Question on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification

Hi Dean, I've been processing your response and the continuing thread with you and Tianran. > > We've been trying to ensure that draft-wu-opsawg-service-model-explained is > > consistent with the latest version of > > draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification. In discus

Re: [netmod] [OPSAWG] Question on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification

ng] and [I-D.ietf-bess-evpn-yang]) are actually device > models. > > I think both of the two I-Ds ([draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification] > and [draft-wu-opsawg-service-model-explained]) can check if those YANG models > are device models or service models. The idea is t

Re: [netmod] Question on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification

> On Jan 19, 2017, at 4:25 PM, Adrian Farrel <adr...@olddog.co.uk> wrote: > > Hi, > > We've been trying to ensure that draft-wu-opsawg-service-model-explained is > consistent with the latest version of > draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification. In discussions wi

[netmod] Question on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification

Hi, We've been trying to ensure that draft-wu-opsawg-service-model-explained is consistent with the latest version of draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification. In discussions with Tianran a question has come up. In section 2 you have a nice definition of Network Service YANG Modules

[netmod] Reference error in draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification

Hi, I think [YANG-Data-Model-for-L3VPN-service-delivery] should point to draft-ietf-l3sm-l3vpn-service-model not (the old) draft-l3vpn-service-yang. Indeed, in general, if you end up having to point to a tools copy of an I-D not a datatracker version, this is usually an indication that you are

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-04

last call on > draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-04. > > The working group last call ends on December 14. Please send your > comments to the netmod mailing list. > > Positive comments, e.g., "I've reviewed this document and > believe it is ready for publica

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-04

-0500, Lou Berger wrote: > All, > This starts a two-week working group last call on > draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-04. > > The working group last call ends on December 14. Please send your > comments to the netmod mailing list. > > Positive comments, e.g., &quo

[netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-04

All, This starts a two-week working group last call on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-04. The working group last call ends on December 14. Please send your comments to the netmod mailing list. Positive comments, e.g., "I've reviewed this document and believe it is

Re: [netmod] Regarding IPR on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification

On 11/28/2016 11:49 PM, Dean Bogdanovic wrote: Chairs, No, I'm not aware of any IPR that applies to this draft Same answer on my side. Regards, B. Dean On Nov 28, 2016, at 11:48 PM, Lou Berger wrote: Authors, Contributors, WG, As part of the preparation for WG Last

Re: [netmod] Regarding IPR on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification

Chairs, No, I'm not aware of any IPR that applies to this draft Dean > On Nov 28, 2016, at 11:48 PM, Lou Berger wrote: > > > Authors, Contributors, WG, > > As part of the preparation for WG Last Call > > Are you aware of any IPR that applies to drafts identified above? >

[netmod] Regarding IPR on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification

Authors, Contributors, WG, As part of the preparation for WG Last Call Are you aware of any IPR that applies to drafts identified above? [NOTE: Adoption poll will be on the first draft, but authors have agreed that -01 WG revision will be based on both.] Please state either: "No, I'm not

Re: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-04.txt

gt; Carl Moberg > Filename : draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-04.txt > Pages : 11 > Date: 2016-10-26 > > Abstract: > The YANG [RFC6020] data modeling language is currently being > co

[netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-04.txt

Carl Moberg Filename: draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-04.txt Pages : 11 Date: 2016-10-26 Abstract: The YANG [RFC6020] data modeling language is currently being considered for a wide variety of applications

[netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-03.txt

Carl Moberg Filename: draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-03.txt Pages : 12 Date: 2016-09-29 Abstract: The YANG [RFC6020] data modeling language is currently being considered for a wide variety of applications

[netmod] yang model classification and yang 1.1

Hi, I think YANG 1.1 should be a normative reference instead of an informative reference since you import definitions in section 1.1 explicitely from YANG 1.1. I do not know whether both RFC 6020 and RFC 6020bis should be normative references or RFC 6020bis is sufficient for the purpose of this

[netmod] draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-02.txt posted

Dear all, We have posted draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification version 2 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification/ We believe that we have addressed all the open issues, and that this draft is ready for WGLC. Regards, Carl, Dean, and Benoit

[netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-02.txt

Carl Moberg Filename: draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-02.txt Pages : 12 Date: 2016-06-22 Abstract: The YANG [RFC6020] data modeling language is currently being considered for a wide variety of applications

Re: [netmod] yang model classification

Joel, > On Apr 24, 2016, at 9:31 PM, Joel M. Halpern wrote: > > What is the relationship between this taxonomy and the many models that do > not fit its cateogrization? > > Three examples: > Models used in ODL to generate results which may be neither network services >

Re: [netmod] yang model classification

What is the relationship between this taxonomy and the many models that do not fit its cateogrization? Three examples: Models used in ODL to generate results which may be neither network services nor network elements. They may be in between, or in some other dimension? Also, models used to

Re: [netmod] yang model classification

Yali > > -邮件原件- > 发件人: Carl Moberg (camoberg) [mailto:camob...@cisco.com] > 发送时间: 2016年4月22日 16:04 > 收件人: zhangyali (D) > 抄送: netmod@ietf.org > 主题: Re: [netmod] yang model classification > > > -- > Carl Moberg > Technology Director, CVG > camob...@cisco.co

Re: [netmod] yang model classification

Yali > > -邮件原件- > 发件人: Carl Moberg (camoberg) [mailto:camob...@cisco.com] > 发送时间: 2016年4月22日 16:04 > 收件人: zhangyali (D) > 抄送: netmod@ietf.org > 主题: Re: [netmod] yang model classification > > > -- > Carl Moberg > Technology Director, CVG > camob...@cisco.co

Re: [netmod] yang model classification

Yali, > On Apr 21, 2016, at 6:03 AM, zhangyali (D) wrote: > > Hi all, > > I noticed that there is a draft intents to classify the various yang model, > it is really a meaningful work. Many points are consistent with my > understanding, whereas, there are some

Re: [netmod] YANG model classification?

atures, I believe we will see more granular patterns of use that we may want to capture in future drafts. > Cheers > --- Alex > > > -Original Message- > From: Carl Moberg (camoberg) > Sent: Friday, April 08, 2016 9:53 AM > To: Andy Bierman <a...@yumaworks.co

Re: [netmod] YANG model classification?

This is too abstract for me. There are definitions in draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-01.txt - it helps us if you can tell us which ones are not precise enough or which ones are missing or which ones you think do not serve a useful purpose. All I wanted to say is that boundaries

Re: [netmod] YANG model classification?

>; Scharf, Michael (Nokia - DE) <michael.sch...@nokia.com>; netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] YANG model classification? Yes, the boundaries are blurry and it does not matter which layering model you use. M.3010 does not change the fact that boundaries are blurry. I think it is

Re: [netmod] YANG model classification?

(camoberg) Sent: Friday, April 08, 2016 9:53 AM To: Andy Bierman <a...@yumaworks.com> Cc: Alexander Clemm (alex) <a...@cisco.com>; netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] YANG model classification? > On Apr 8, 2016, at 3:36 PM, Andy Bierman <a...@yumaworks.com> wrote: >

Re: [netmod] YANG model classification?

3010, > > covering the "Network management” and “Element management” layers. At least > > that’s the intent :-) > > > > > Would it make sense to see if the layering in M.3010 could help guide > > > YANG model classification, and reference those definitions? > >

Re: [netmod] YANG model classification?

> > > > > > > -- > > Carl Moberg > > Technology Director, CVG > > camob...@cisco.com > > > >> On Apr 7, 2016, at 10:55 AM, Scharf, Michael (Nokia - DE) < > michael.sch...@nokia.com> wrote: > >> > >>> I come at this from t

Re: [netmod] YANG model classification?

-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Carl Moberg > (camoberg) > Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2016 1:57 AM > To: Scharf, Michael (Nokia - DE) <michael.sch...@nokia.com> > Cc: netmod@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [netmod] YANG model classification? > > > > -- > Carl Moberg

Re: [netmod] YANG model classification?

Message- > From: netmod [mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Carl Moberg > (camoberg) > Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2016 1:57 AM > To: Scharf, Michael (Nokia - DE) <michael.sch...@nokia.com> > Cc: netmod@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [netmod] YANG model classification? &

Re: [netmod] YANG model classification?

om: netmod [mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Carl Moberg (camoberg) Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2016 1:57 AM To: Scharf, Michael (Nokia - DE) <michael.sch...@nokia.com> Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] YANG model classification? -- Carl Moberg Technology Director, CVG camob...@cisco

Re: [netmod] YANG model classification?

; > > > > > > I come at this from the classification angle, so my > interest > > > is if > > > > > the > > > > > > > assumption that > > > > > > > > > a YANG model can only be classified as a network service > model > >

Re: [netmod] YANG model classification?

7, 2016 at 08:55:19AM +, Scharf, Michael (Nokia - > > DE) > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > I come at this from the classification angle, so my interest > > is if > > > > the > > > > > > assumption that > >

Re: [netmod] YANG model classification?

t; wrote: > > > > > > > I come at this from the classification angle, so my interest > is if > > > the > > > > > assumption that > > > > > > > a YANG model can only be classified as a network service model > XOR > > > a > >

Re: [netmod] YANG model classification?

model XOR > a > > > network device model > > > > > according to the definitions in > > > draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification (sections 2.1 > > > > > and 2.2). Based on this discussion I take it that some models are > > > intended to be

Re: [netmod] YANG model classification?

at this from the classification angle, so my interest is if the > > assumption that > > > > a YANG model can only be classified as a network service model XOR a > > network device model > > > > according to the definitions in > > draft-ietf-netmod-ya

Re: [netmod] YANG model classification?

that > > > a YANG model can only be classified as a network service model XOR a > network device model > > > according to the definitions in > draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification (sections 2.1 > > > and 2.2). Based on this discussion I take it that some mode

Re: [netmod] YANG model classification?

gt; assumption that >>> a YANG model can only be classified as a network service model XOR a >>> network device model >>> according to the definitions in draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification >>> (sections 2.1 >>> and 2.2). Based on this discus

Re: [netmod] YANG model classification?

vice model > > according to the definitions in draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification > > (sections 2.1 > > and 2.2). Based on this discussion I take it that some models are intended > > to be able to > > serve in both roles. And we should make sure that it’s supported

Re: [netmod] YANG model classification?

YANG model can only be classified as a network service model XOR a network >> device model >> according to the definitions in draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification >> (sections 2.1 >> and 2.2). Based on this discussion I take it that some models are intended >>

Re: [netmod] YANG model classification?

) Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2016 17:33 To: Lou Berger Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] YANG model classification? Not sure either captures the case where, in the same network, there are instances of the model on NEs and on the management systems. Does "both" cover that

Re: [netmod] YANG model classification?

>> implemented in a network element, on a management system or perhaps either? >> >> -- >> Carl Moberg >> Technology Director, CVG >> camob...@cisco.com >> >>> On Apr 6, 2016, at 8:09 PM, Scharf, Michael (Nokia - DE) >>> <michael.sch..

Re: [netmod] YANG model classification?

oberg Technology Director, CVG camob...@cisco.com On Apr 6, 2016, at 8:09 PM, Scharf, Michael (Nokia - DE) <michael.sch...@nokia.com> wrote: draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification suggests that a YANG model is either a "Network Element YANG Model" or a "Network Service YAN

Re: [netmod] YANG model classification?

nokia.com> wrote: > > draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification suggests that a YANG model is > either a "Network Element YANG Model" or a "Network Service YANG Model". > > How would draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-topo be classified according

[netmod] YANG model classification?

draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification suggests that a YANG model is either a "Network Element YANG Model" or a "Network Service YANG Model". How would draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-topo be classified according to that? Though

[netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-01.txt

Carl Moberg Filename: draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-01.txt Pages : 9 Date: 2016-04-04 Abstract: The YANG [RFC6020] data modeling language is currently being considered for a wide variety of applications

Re: [netmod] I-D Action:draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-00.txt

is • Section 3.3 • s/what is covered/that covered HTH, Jonathan From: internet-dra...@ietf.org Sent: 08 December 2015 02:17 To: i-d-annou...@ietf.org Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: [netmod] I-D Action:draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-00.txt A New Internet-Draft is available from

[netmod] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-00.txt

NETMOD, Please find a renamed and slightly updated -00 version of what used to be draft-bogdanovic-netmod-yang-model-classification-05 > Begin forwarded message: > > From: <internet-dra...@ietf.org> > Subject: New Version Notification for > draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-

[netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-00.txt

Benoit Claise Carl Moberg Filename: draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-00.txt Pages : 9 Date: 2015-12-07 Abstract: The YANG [RFC6020] data modeling language is currently being considered for a wide variety

Re: [netmod] Call to adopt draft-bogdanovic-netmod-yang-model-classification-05 as NETMOD WG Draft

blish the document as > draft-netmod-yang-model-classification-00 and notify the WG? > > Thank you, > > —Tom > > > >> On Nov 30, 2015:4:40 AM, at 4:40 AM, Nadeau Thomas <tnad...@lucidvision.com> >> wrote: >> >> >> NE

Re: [netmod] Comments on draft-bogdanovic-netmod-yang-model-classification-03

Eric, Thanks for the feedback, comments inline below. On Jun 5, 2015, at 8:17 AM, Osborne, Eric eric.osbo...@level3.com wrote: General comments: the doc is pretty straightforward in many of its aims but parts of it are confusing. Certain sections need some copyediting and an infusion