Re: [netmod] tree diagram guidelines

I am confused. I think there was some consensus to - include all tree related guidelines in the tree document, remove all tree related guidelines from 6087bis and have 6087bis point to the tree document (which it already does) The rest is pointless since AFAIK there is no wiki guidelines

Re: [netmod] intended status of the tree diagram document

Lou, right now, the document says standards track, Martin's proposal was to move to informational. So how do I parse "I think you are correct. We should leave as is."? /js On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 07:36:58AM +0800, Lou Berger wrote: > Martin, > I think you are correct. We should leave as

Re: [netmod] Comment on draft-clacla-netmod-yang-model-update-02

On 11/15/17 05:38, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > On Wed, 2017-11-15 at 05:27 -0500, Joe Clarke wrote: >> On 11/15/17 05:06, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: I suppose my gut reaction to Lou's question as to whether a server should support multiple versions was, "no." A client may have multiple

[netmod] Support for draft-bierman-netmod-yang-data-ext

I wanted to drop a note to the list in support of adoption for draft-bierman-netmod-yang-data-ext. I had a strong need for this in the recent past in order to create a model for a complex data structure, and I had to do some unnatural stuff to achieve my goal. In my read through the document,

Re: [netmod] tree diagram guidelines

Sounds perfect to me. Mehmet > -Original Message- > From: Lou Berger [mailto:lber...@labn.net] > Sent: Friday, November 17, 2017 7:43 AM > To: Mehmet Ersue ; 'Mahesh Jethanandani' > ; 'Robert Wilton' > Cc: netmod@ietf.org >

Re: [netmod] tree diagram guidelines

To circle back to this. My sense of this discussion (as contributor) is (a) the tree diagrams draft should be updated to point to a "guidelines" wiki page for "the most current guidelines" (b) the tree diagrams draft should be updated to include a full set of the current tree related

Re: [netmod] intended status of the tree diagram document

Martin, I think you are correct. We should leave as is. I'm sure Kent/the document Shepherd makes sure whatever we do is right before publication in any case. Lou (as contributor) On 11/15/2017 8:58 PM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: Hi, Currently, draft-ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams

Re: [netmod] [Netconf] Alternative YANG library structure for 7895bis

Robert Wilton wrote: > Hi Andy, > > > On 16/11/2017 02:29, Andy Bierman wrote: > > Hi, > > > > The per-datastore feature aspect of NMDA is a new and significant > > change to YANG. > > > >>     |  |  +--ro feature* [name] > >>     |  |  |  +--ro name yang:yang-identifier > >>