----- Original Message -----
From: "Clyde Wildes (cwildes)" <cwil...@cisco.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2018 9:21 PM
> Kent, Tom, Yaron, and Ron,
>
> A new version of the draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model has been published
that addresses your concerns.
Optimist:-)
And we can always have fresh concerns:-(
I note that this I-D imports interface-ref from RFC7223 while
draft-ietf-netmod-rfc7223bis
is in the RFC Edittor's queue. I do not think that there is any reason
not to use the latter.
Tom Petch
>
> Thanks,
>
> Clyde
>
> On 2/20/18, 9:06 AM, "netmod on behalf of Kent Watsen"
<netmod-boun...@ietf.org on behalf of kwat...@juniper.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> > Kent
> >
> > You illustrate beautifully the problem I would like a solution
to.
> >
> > The current thinking AFAICT is that tree-diagrams
> > should be an Informative Reference.
> >
> > Therefore, the RFC Editor will not hold publication until an RFC
number
> > is assigned.
> >
> > Therefore, a note asking the I-D reference to be updated to
reflect the
> > assigned RFC number is null - the RFC can be published with the
> > reference as an i-d and not as an RFC which is what I expect the
RFC
> > Editor to do.
> >
> > QED
>
>
> Except I know that this draft will be stuck in MISREF state and
tree-diagrams
> will in fact be assigned an RFC number by the time this draft is
published.
>
> K.
>
>
> > Note that this is not the case of a Normative i-d reference
being buried
> > in the YANG module and not being.noticed by the RFC Editor; that
problem
> > I am content with.
> >
> >
> >Tom Petch
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> > Please also address these issues when posting -21 to address
Benoit's
> issues. Please post -21 ASAP as Benoit has already placed this
draft on
> the IESG telechat in a couple weeks.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Kent // shepherd
> >
> >
> > On 2/14/18, 8:18 AM, "netmod on behalf of Benoit Claise"
> <netmod-boun...@ietf.org<mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org> on behalf
of
> bcla...@cisco.com<mailto:bcla...@cisco.com>> wrote:
> >
> > Dear all,
> >
> > - the draft is NMDA compliant, right? It should be mentioned.
> > Ex: draft-ietf-netmod-rfc7223bis-03, in the abstract and intro
> >
> > The YANG model in this document conforms to the Network
Management
> >
> > Datastore Architecture defined in
> I-D.ietf-netmod-revised-datastores.
> >
> >
> > - As mentioned in the writeup,
[I-D.ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams]
> should be an informative reference, not normative.
> >
> > - Editorial:
> > OLD:
> > This draft addresses the common leafs
> > NEW:
> > This document addresses the common leafs
> >
> > Please publish a new version asap.
> > In the mean time, I'm sending this draft to IETF LC.
> >
> > Regards, Benoit
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
------
> --------
>
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > netmod mailing list
> > netmod@ietf.org
> >
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailma
n_listinfo_netmod&d=DwICaQ&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI
&r=9zkP0xnJUvZGJ9EPoOH7Yhqn2gsBYaGTvjISlaJdcZo&m=cJ7MVnQVc1hgxpVF7oYiVn6
Rbm-Qf2dDyrfYhL-s9io&s=u0Hn9GkO-B0jUGm1MnIQ4x4AgIZNXHBIaZhTPmt3dC8&e=
> >
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
