Hi Lada, On 12/18/17, 7:19 AM, "Ladislav Lhotka" <lho...@nic.cz> wrote:
>Hi Acee, > >"Acee Lindem (acee)" <a...@cisco.com> writes: > >> Hi Lou, et al, >> >> The only issue we are struggling with is whether we need to specify the >> version in the ietf-interfaces import. We have noted that >> draft-ietf-netmod-rfc7277bis-01.txt does not import by revision. > >I would suggest to import *without* revision but add a description >indicating that the NMDA-compatible revisions are needed. > >Importing by revision is clearly suboptimal. Hopefully a new mechanism >such as semantic versioning will be introduced soon to alleviate this >issue. I agree and will update the description. > >> >> We also have so nits: >> >> 1. Add an informative reference for >> [I-D.ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams]. >> 2. Based on a comment from Vladimir, we added the prefix for >> ietf-routing.yang, “rt:”, to several references within >>ietf-routing.yang. >> Was this necessary? Of course, the model compiles with or without the >> prefix. > >RFC6087bis has some rules in sec. 4.2, and these should be followed. Will review these. > >Also, the security considerations should IMO be changed, see my recent >message: > >https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netmod/current/msg19610.html > >Of course, the NEW formulation needn't be exactly as I suggested, but >the text "The YANG module [...] is designed to be accessed ..." is >apparently wrong and shouldn't be used any more. Ok - I will also review the “Security Considerations” template. Thanks, Acee > >Thanks, Lada > >> >> Thanks, >> Acee >> >> On 12/15/17, 3:55 PM, "netmod on behalf of Lou Berger" >> <netmod-boun...@ietf.org on behalf of lber...@labn.net> wrote: >> >>>All, >>> This last call is closed. >>> >>>We note that there was an update during the LC and that no comments were >>>received during the LC period. As this is simply a mechanical update >>>that has been discussed in the WG we plan to proceed with the >>>publication process. >>> >>>Authors, >>> Please let/us the WG know when you have published a version ready for >>>publication. Also please let the WG know what has changed in the >>>document since the start of LC (rev -01) >>> >>>Thank you, >>>NetMod Chairs >>> >>> >>> >>>On 11/29/2017 12:26 PM, Lou Berger wrote: >>>> All, >>>> >>>> This starts a two-week working group last call on >>>> draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8022bis-01. >>>> >>>> Please recall that this update's intention is to >>>> modify the YANG module to be in line with the NMDA >>>> guidelines [1]. Reviewing the diff between the two >>>> drafts [2] should reveal just this. >>>> >>>> The working group last call ends on December 13. >>>> Please send your comments to the netmod mailing list. >>>> >>>> Positive comments, e.g., "I've reviewed this document >>>> and believe it is ready for publication", are welcome! >>>> This is useful and important, even from authors. >>>> >>>> [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dsdt-nmda-guidelines-01 >>>> [2] >>>>https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?difftype=--hwdiff&url1=rfc8022.txt&url2= >>>>dr >>>>aft-ietf-netmod-rfc8022bis-01.txt >>>> >>>> Thank you, >>>> Netmod Chairs >>>> >>> >>>_______________________________________________ >>>netmod mailing list >>>netmod@ietf.org >>>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod >> >> _______________________________________________ >> netmod mailing list >> netmod@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod > >-- >Ladislav Lhotka >Head, CZ.NIC Labs >PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67 _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
