Hi Benoit,

On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 5:47 AM, Benoit Claise <[email protected]> wrote:

> Benoit Claise has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-rip-08: 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.)
>
>
> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
>
>
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-rip/
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Looking at the YANG modules dependencies. See
> https://www.yangcatalog.org/yang-search/impact_analysis.
> php?modules[][email protected]&recurse=0&rfcs=1&
> show_subm=1&show_dir=dependencies
>
> I would appreciate an update from the RTG ADs on these 3 normative
> references:
>
>    [I-D.ietf-bfd-yang]
>               Rahman, R., Zheng, L., Jethanandani, M., Networks, J., and
>               G. Mirsky, "YANG Data Model for Bidirectional Forwarding
>               Detection (BFD)", draft-ietf-bfd-yang-07 (work in
>               progress), October 2017.
>
>    [I-D.ietf-isis-yang-isis-cfg]
>               Litkowski, S., Yeung, D., Lindem, A., Zhang, Z., and L.
>               Lhotka, "YANG Data Model for IS-IS protocol", draft-ietf-
>               isis-yang-isis-cfg-19 (work in progress), November 2017.
>
>    [I-D.ietf-ospf-yang]
>               Yeung, D., Qu, Y., Zhang, Z., Chen, I., and A. Lindem,
>               "Yang Data Model for OSPF Protocol", draft-ietf-ospf-
>               yang-09 (work in progress), October 2017.
>
> Any risk that the content will change and impact the YANG module in
> draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-rip? All other YANG module dependencies are either on
> this telechat or the next one (RFC8022bis).
>

I don't believe that there is a risk.  The IS-IS and OSPF ones  are simply
because RIP can import routes from either.  I don't see any dependency on
how
those models are structured.    For BFD, the structure of that is set and
there was discussion during last call to make sure this was properly
aligned.

The OSPF and IS-IS models are both close, I believe.


Regards,
Alia
_______________________________________________
rtgwg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg

Reply via email to