Hi,
The WG should decide what it means for YANG to not
be NETCONF-specific. Why does YANG define extensions
to NETCONF operations (like insert)? IMO the normative text
about NETCONF should not be in the YANG RFC.
Andy
___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ie
Hi,
I would like to open another issue for YANG 1.1,
because I don't want to have 1.1 and then 1.2 right away.
The NETMOD WG should evaluate the different ways to
support ephemeral state, based on Jeff's draft.
Andy
___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.
On Sat, Jul 25, 2015 at 1:25 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder <
j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de> wrote:
> This is the summary of the discussion of YANG 1.1 issue Y60 at the
> IETF 93 meeting in Prague:
>
> - It is OK for a YANG 1.1 module to import a YANG 1.0 module (which
>will of course be in
This is the summary of the discussion of YANG 1.1 issue Y60 at the
IETF 93 meeting in Prague:
- It is OK for a YANG 1.1 module to import a YANG 1.0 module (which
will of course be interpreted according to the YANG 1.0 rules).
- The YANG 1.1 RFC will not obsolete RFC 6020. (RFC 6020 may be