Hi all, I've just published the -01 version of this draft that has quite a lot of updates and fixes and should hopefully incorporate the comments that I have received. There is already a later version on GitHub (https://github.com/rgwilton/iana-yang-guidance?tab=readme-ov-file) that contains a couple more tweaks from Reshad and some spelling corrections.
As a reminder this is an informational draft, for which the abstract is: This document provides guidance to the RFC Editor and IANA on managing YANG modules in RFCs and IANA registries, ensuring consistent application of YANG Semantic Versioning rules. I'll be presenting this draft in the NETMOD session on Wednesday morning. I think that there are 4 open issues that need to be addressed: 1. Do we need guidance to IANA in this document to list modules both by revision date and version? I.e., following the filename convention. 2. This document is informational, is it appropriate to use RFC 2119 language? 3. For the RFC Editor and ADs, do we want to allow the RFC Editor to apply errata to IETF YANG modules? 4. For Section 5<https://rgwilton.github.io/iana-yang-guidance/draft-ietf-netmod-iana-yang-guidance.html#sec-background>, should we give examples of the rules, or just reference the module versioning draft [Reshad]? Depending on the feedback received it may be that we can get these addressed quickly, and then I'm wondering whether we will want [another] round of reviews, of whether it would make sense to go directly to WG LC? On the one hand this document hasn't had that much in the way of reviews (it is quite new), but on the other hand it is only informational guidance and we are wanting to move it through the process quickly. Kind regards, Rob
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
