Kent Watsen writes:
> Lada writes:
>> Andy writes:
>>>IMO, the yang-data defined in RFC 8040 has a clear purpose, and it
>>>is sufficient for that purpose, which is a YANG representation of
>>>an instance document (such as a protocol message or file).
>>
>> The same is basically true even without
On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 08:33:58PM +, Kent Watsen wrote:
>
> Juergen writes:
> > Kent writes:
> >> I don't understand talk about abandoning this draft. There is no question
> >> that it is needed (e.g., anima vouch, zerotouch, tail-f's "structure"),
> >> and RFC 8040 is unsatisfactory because
Juergen writes:
> Kent writes:
>> I don't understand talk about abandoning this draft. There is no question
>> that it is needed (e.g., anima vouch, zerotouch, tail-f's "structure"),
>> and RFC 8040 is unsatisfactory because 1) it doesn't allow a top-level
>> 'choice' between two containers and 2
Thank you, Mahesh and Sonal.
I'm still waiting to hear from Lisa and Dana. Neither have been heard from
since the pen moved a couple years ago. Is anyone aware of Lisa or Dana's
current email?
Let's give it a few days but, if we don't hear back from them shortly, I
recommend moving their n
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 05:57:34PM +, Kent Watsen wrote:
>
> I don't understand talk about abandoning this draft. There is no question
> that it is needed (e.g., anima vouch, zerotouch, tail-f's "structure"),
> and RFC 8040 is unsatisfactory because 1) it doesn't allow a top-level
> 'choice'
