Joel Jaeggli has requested publication of
draft-ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams-05 as Best Current Practice on behalf of
the NETMOD working group.
Please verify the document's state at
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams/
___
> On Jan 23, 2018, at 9:21 PM, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote:
>
> Hi Ben,
>
> On 1/23/18, 9:56 PM, "Ben Campbell" wrote:
>
[…]
>
>
>--
>COMMENT:
>--
Hi Ben,
On 1/23/18, 9:56 PM, "Ben Campbell" wrote:
Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8022bis-09: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines
Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8022bis-09: 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
Thanks Francis!
Acee
On 1/23/18, 5:55 PM, "Francis Dupont" wrote:
Reviewer: Francis Dupont
Review result: Ready
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF
Reviewer: Francis Dupont
Review result: Ready
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please wait for direction from your
document shepherd or AD before posting a new versio
On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 04:52:50PM +, Kent Watsen wrote:
>
> Not currently, as there are two vocal groups with opposing
> viewpoints. However, there was strong for advancing it
> before. The chairs had to make a decision and, as you can
> imagine, it wasn't easy. Ultimately, to use a coll
On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 08:05:54PM +, Kent Watsen wrote:
>
> Thank you all for the important discussion since the completion of WGLC on
> Nov 6th.
>
> Per normal process, drafts typically progress once LC comments are address
> unless significant faults are found. Post LC comments have bee
> So do you believe that this decision reflects rough consensus
> in the WG?
Not currently, as there are two vocal groups with opposing
viewpoints. However, there was strong for advancing it
before. The chairs had to make a decision and, as you can
imagine, it wasn't easy. Ultimately, to use
On 1/23/18 3:24 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> So do you believe that this decision reflects rough consensus in the
> WG?
>
> I hope that the document writeup will show that the WG is divided on
> this issue.
>
> For the record, if this means that using Schema Mount *with* NMDA gets
> dela
Hi,
I just posted draft-ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams-05.txt. It
addressed the issue below, and the other WGLC issues:
o the main tree now uses 2 spaces for indentation instead of 4
o added example for expanded/unexpanded grouping
o fixed errors in the row syntax
o aligned all ex
Hi,
So do you believe that this decision reflects rough consensus in the
WG?
I hope that the document writeup will show that the WG is divided on
this issue.
For the record, if this means that using Schema Mount *with* NMDA gets
delayed, I strongly object to this decision.
Assuming this documen
12 matches
Mail list logo
