Hi Sarah, the YANG compiling worked, and we would like to make a final review regarding editorial things. I assume we will upload the version on datatracker soon. We will give you a hint.
Best Regards Roland -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Sarah Tarrant <[email protected]> Gesendet: Dienstag, 20. Januar 2026 15:12 An: Schott, Roland <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Betreff: Re: Document intake questions abou <draft-ietf-alto-oam-yang-17> Hi Roland, Thank you for the update! I'll be on the lookout for that new version. Sincerely, Sarah Tarrant RFC Production Center > On Jan 20, 2026, at 6:13 AM, <[email protected]> > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Sarah, > > we made good progress regarding the validation of our draft and expect to > post a document version update. > > Before uploading the version, we want to do additional checks of the document > e.g., YANG examples. > As stated earlier, we expect to fix the issues until end of January. > > Best Regards > > Roland > on behalf of the authors > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Sarah Tarrant <[email protected]> > Gesendet: Freitag, 16. Januar 2026 21:26 > An: Schott, Roland <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; > [email protected]; [email protected]; > [email protected]; [email protected]; > [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; > [email protected] > Betreff: Re: Document intake questions abou > <draft-ietf-alto-oam-yang-17> > > Hi Roland, > > Thank you for the update! Do you expect to post a document version update to > the datatracker? > > Sincerely, > Sarah Tarrant > RFC Production Center > >> On Jan 16, 2026, at 12:07 PM, <[email protected]> >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi Sarah, >> >> we as authors had an alignment meeting. >> Regarding the YANG validation, see >> https://www.yangcatalog.org/yangvalidator?draft=draft-ietf-alto-oam-yang-17 >> , we identified that validation is not working. >> We think that we need until end of January to fix the issues. >> Regarding the update, we will focus only on fixing of compiling issues and >> will not do changes regarding the draft itself. >> >> Best Regards >> >> Roland on behalf of the authors >> >> >> >> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- >> Von: Sarah Tarrant <[email protected]> >> Gesendet: Montag, 12. Januar 2026 22:56 >> An: [email protected]; [email protected]; >> [email protected]; Schott, Roland <[email protected]>; >> [email protected] >> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; >> [email protected]; [email protected]; >> [email protected]; [email protected] >> Betreff: Re: Document intake questions abou >> <draft-ietf-alto-oam-yang-17> >> >> Hi Author(s), >> >> This is a friendly reminder that we await answers to the questions below >> before continuing with the editing process for this document. >> >> Thank you, >> Sarah Tarrant >> RFC Production Center >> >>> On Jan 5, 2026, at 10:26 AM, [email protected] wrote: >>> >>> Hi Sara, >>> >>> thank you for your reminder. >>> We will get back to you soon. >>> >>> Best Regards >>> >>> Roland >>> >>> >>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- >>> Von: Sarah Tarrant <[email protected]> >>> Gesendet: Montag, 5. Januar 2026 16:51 >>> An: [email protected]; [email protected]; >>> [email protected]; Schott, Roland <[email protected]>; >>> [email protected] >>> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; >>> [email protected]; [email protected]; >>> [email protected]; [email protected] >>> Betreff: Re: Document intake questions abou >>> <draft-ietf-alto-oam-yang-17> >>> >>> Hi Author(s), >>> >>> This is a friendly reminder that we await answers to the questions below >>> before continuing with the editing process for this document. >>> >>> Thank you, >>> Sarah Tarrant >>> RFC Production Center >>> >>>> On Dec 19, 2025, at 4:34 PM, [email protected] wrote: >>>> >>>> Author(s), >>>> >>>> Congratulations, your document has been successfully added to the RFC >>>> Editor queue! >>>> The team at the RFC Production Center (RPC) is looking forward to >>>> working with you as your document moves forward toward publication. >>>> To help reduce processing time and improve editing accuracy, please >>>> respond to the questions below. Please confer with your coauthors >>>> (or authors of other documents if your document is in a >>>> cluster) as necessary prior to taking action in order to streamline >>>> communication. >>>> If your document has multiple authors, only one author needs to >>>> reply to this message. >>>> >>>> As you read through the rest of this email: >>>> >>>> * If you need/want to make updates to your document, we encourage >>>> you to make those changes and resubmit to the Datatracker. This >>>> allows for the easy creation of diffs, which facilitates review by >>>> interested parties (e.g., authors, ADs, doc shepherds). >>>> * If you feel no updates to the document are necessary, please >>>> reply with any applicable rationale/comments. >>>> >>>> >>>> Please note that the RPC team will not work on your document until >>>> we hear from you (that is, your document will remain in AUTH state >>>> until we receive a reply). Even if you don't have guidance or don't >>>> feel that you need to make any updates to the document, you need to >>>> let us know. After we hear from you, your document will start >>>> moving through the queue. You will be able to review and approve our >>>> updates during AUTH48. >>>> >>>> Please feel free to contact us with any questions you may have at >>>> [email protected]. >>>> >>>> Thank you! >>>> The RPC Team >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> 1) As there may have been multiple updates made to the document >>>> during Last Call, please review the current version of the document: >>>> >>>> * Is the text in the Abstract still accurate? >>>> * Are the Authors' Addresses, Contributors, and Acknowledgments >>>> sections current? >>>> >>>> >>>> 2) Please share any style information that could help us with >>>> editing your document. For example: >>>> >>>> * Is your document's format or its terminology based on another document? >>>> If so, please provide a pointer to that document (e.g., this >>>> document's terminology should match DNS terminology in RFC 9499). >>>> * Is there a pattern of capitalization or formatting of terms? >>>> (e.g., field names should have initial capitalization; parameter >>>> names should be in double quotes; <tt/> should be used for token >>>> names; >>>> etc.) >>>> >>>> >>>> 3) Please review the entries in the References section carefully >>>> with the following in mind. Note that we will update as follows >>>> unless we hear otherwise at this time: >>>> >>>> * References to obsoleted RFCs will be updated to point to the >>>> current RFC on the topic in accordance with Section 4.8.6 of RFC >>>> 7322 (RFC Style Guide). >>>> >>>> * References to I-Ds that have been replaced by another I-D will be >>>> updated to point to the replacement I-D. >>>> >>>> * References to documents from other organizations that have been >>>> superseded will be updated to their superseding version. >>>> >>>> Note: To check for outdated RFC and I-D references, you can use >>>> idnits <https://aut/ >>>> hor-tools.ietf.org%2Fidnits&data=05%7C02%7CRoland.Schott%40telekom. >>>> d >>>> e >>>> % >>>> 7C326ba11cdc01493f702008de4c725543%7Cbde4dffc4b604cf68b04a5eeb25f5c >>>> 4 >>>> f >>>> % >>>> 7C0%7C0%7C639032251226899271%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcG >>>> k >>>> i >>>> O >>>> nRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoy >>>> f >>>> Q >>>> % >>>> 3D%3D%7C40000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=5pirYaiiFjSBcufGUO%2BGjn8DNcO31ZAOfGRx >>>> O >>>> 5 r t9F0%3D&reserved=0>. You can also help the IETF Tools Team by >>>> testing >>>> idnits3 >>>> <https://aut/ >>>> hor-tools.ietf.org%2Fidnits3%2F&data=05%7C02%7CRoland.Schott%40tele >>>> k >>>> o >>>> m >>>> .de%7C326ba11cdc01493f702008de4c725543%7Cbde4dffc4b604cf68b04a5eeb2 >>>> 5 >>>> f >>>> 5 >>>> c4f%7C0%7C0%7C639032251226928827%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU >>>> 1 >>>> h >>>> c >>>> GkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldU >>>> I >>>> j >>>> o >>>> yfQ%3D%3D%7C40000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=y64o%2BuwLOE93QmPKpO0nYMKr8BUIKVyi >>>> X S a u2xR98hI%3D&reserved=0> with your document and reporting any >>>> issues to them. >>>> >>>> >>>> 4) Is there any text that should be handled extra cautiously? For >>>> example, are there any sections that were contentious when the document >>>> was drafted? >>>> >>>> >>>> 5) Is there anything else that the RPC should be aware of while >>>> editing this document? >>>> >>>> >>>> 6) This document uses one or more of the following text styles. >>>> Are these elements used consistently? >>>> >>>> * fixed width font (<tt/> or `) >>>> * italics (<em/> or *) >>>> * bold (<strong/> or **) >>>> >>>> >>>> 7) This document contains sourcecode: >>>> >>>> * Does the sourcecode validate? >>>> * Some sourcecode types (e.g., YANG) require certain references >>>> and/or text in the Security Considerations section. Is this information >>>> correct? >>>> * Is the sourcecode type indicated in the XML? (See information >>>> about >>>> types: >>>> https://www/. >>>> rfc-editor.org%2Frpc%2Fwiki%2Fdoku.php%3Fid%3Dsourcecode-types&data >>>> = >>>> 0 >>>> 5 >>>> %7C02%7CRoland.Schott%40telekom.de%7C326ba11cdc01493f702008de4c7255 >>>> 4 >>>> 3 >>>> % >>>> 7Cbde4dffc4b604cf68b04a5eeb25f5c4f%7C0%7C0%7C639032251226946805%7CU >>>> n >>>> k >>>> n >>>> own%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiO >>>> i >>>> J >>>> X >>>> aW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C40000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=QyF >>>> M >>>> k >>>> E >>>> zeZxJ0X%2FlHBArE0U9mIcV5MDFOlyu7icGPhNY%3D&reserved=0.) >>>> >>>> >>>> 8) This document is part of Cluster 463. >>>> >>>> * To help the reader understand the content of the cluster, is >>>> there a document in the cluster that should be read first? Next? If >>>> so, please provide the order and we will provide RFC numbers for the >>>> documents accordingly. >>>> If order is not important, please let us know. >>>> * Is there any text that has been repeated within the cluster >>>> document that should be edited in the same way (for instance, >>>> parallel introductory text or Security Considerations)? >>>> * For more information about clusters, see https://www/. >>>> rfc-editor.org%2Fabout%2Fclusters%2F&data=05%7C02%7CRoland.Schott%4 >>>> 0 >>>> t >>>> e >>>> lekom.de%7C326ba11cdc01493f702008de4c725543%7Cbde4dffc4b604cf68b04a >>>> 5 >>>> e >>>> e >>>> b25f5c4f%7C0%7C0%7C639032251226964205%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFb >>>> X >>>> B >>>> 0 >>>> eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCI >>>> s >>>> I >>>> l >>>> dUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C40000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=HRWmw2zECw5ryl0VjD2imD7TIHu%2 >>>> B >>>> v >>>> W >>>> c3LXTIp440opg%3D&reserved=0 >>>> * For a list of all current clusters, see: >>>> http://www/. >>>> r%2F&data=05%7C02%7CRoland.Schott%40telekom.de%7C3e80060f3c0845cdb3 >>>> 9 >>>> a >>>> 08de52256f87%7Cbde4dffc4b604cf68b04a5eeb25f5c4f%7C0%7C0%7C639038517 >>>> 9 >>>> 1 >>>> 8387666%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjA >>>> u >>>> M >>>> DAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7 >>>> C >>>> & >>>> sdata=nbT8DbqXP27WH4saIfLt4uEK0Flqq2SmKIWtGOmvX2I%3D&reserved=0 >>>> fc-editor.org%2Fall_clusters.php&data=05%7C02%7CRoland.Schott%40tel >>>> e >>>> k >>>> o >>>> m.de%7C326ba11cdc01493f702008de4c725543%7Cbde4dffc4b604cf68b04a5eeb >>>> 2 >>>> 5 >>>> f >>>> 5c4f%7C0%7C0%7C639032251226986575%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0e >>>> U >>>> 1 >>>> h >>>> cGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIld >>>> U >>>> I >>>> j >>>> oyfQ%3D%3D%7C40000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=%2BTWTweFneyEp0PJqVX77AlMI1cXcZJ7 >>>> h >>>> R >>>> r >>>> ZWeRMD1Fo%3D&reserved=0 > > -- auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
