Hi -
On 2023-01-13 10:20 AM, Kent Watsen wrote:
On Jan 13, 2023, at 11:25 AM, Benoit Claise
wrote:
Hi Tom,
Yes I do think that people outside the IETF may be ignorant of the nuances of
the way the IETF works and may not realise that a URL to the IANA website must
be used in preference
I am having the feeling that the discussion is converging about the
recommendation to reference the URL instead of the RFC where the initial
version of the YANG module has been published
Is my understanding correct?
I agree it would be good to document such a guideline in an update to RFC 8407
On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 10:10 AM Italo Busi wrote:
> Thanks Andy
>
>
>
> I agree with your statement “yang-identifier SHOULD be used instead of
> string for key leafs” and that “yang-identifier is always the most
> appropriate type to use for a key”
>
>
>
> The issue is that there are many YANG
> On Jan 13, 2023, at 11:25 AM, Benoit Claise
> wrote:
>
> Hi Tom,
>> Yes I do think that people outside the IETF may be ignorant of the nuances
>> of the way the IETF works and may not realise that a URL to the IANA
>> website must be used in preference to an RFC. There is more to YANG
Thanks Andy
I agree with your statement “yang-identifier SHOULD be used instead of string
for key leafs” and that “yang-identifier is always the most appropriate type to
use for a key”
The issue is that there are many YANG models either published as RFC or in
progress which are using string
On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 9:31 AM Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> Andy Bierman wrote:
> >> Fengchong (frank) wrote:
> >> > Hi Michael,
> >> > You can use augment-structure to extend a yang structure.
> >>
> >> You can't use augment-structure to extend in-place an existing yang
Andy Bierman wrote:
>> Fengchong (frank) wrote:
>> > Hi Michael,
>> > You can use augment-structure to extend a yang structure.
>>
>> You can't use augment-structure to extend in-place an existing yang
>> structure
>> Augment-structure produces a new structure with a
On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 8:19 AM Rob Wilton (rwilton) wrote:
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: netmod On Behalf Of Jürgen Schönwälder
> > Sent: 12 January 2023 15:46
> > To: Italo Busi
> > Cc: netmod@ietf.org
> > Subject: Re: [netmod] Use of unrestricted string in YANG (was RE:
From: netmod on behalf of Italo Busi
Sent: 13 January 2023 11:32
Andy, Carsten, Jürgen, Tom,
Thanks for your feedbacks
If I understand correctly:
* Andy, Carsten and Jürgen agree that using unrestricted string for non-key
attributes makes sense
* Andy has a concern only about
Hi Tom,
Yes I do think that people outside the IETF may be ignorant of the nuances of
the way the IETF works and may not realise that a URL to the IANA website must
be used in preference to an RFC. There is more to YANG modules than extracting
the code from somewhere in order to incorporate
Hi,
I have reviewed this document and believe it's in good shape. I'd like to see
the changes suggested by Joe/Mahesh ("stop" action and use of identity for
actions).
Regards,Reshad.
On Friday, January 13, 2023, 08:05:29 AM EST, Kent Watsen
wrote:
Dear NETMOD WG,
This message begins
> -Original Message-
> From: netmod On Behalf Of Jürgen Schönwälder
> Sent: 12 January 2023 15:46
> To: Italo Busi
> Cc: netmod@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [netmod] Use of unrestricted string in YANG (was RE: naming scope
> of a grouping which uses a grouping)
>
> My take is that
Hi Joe, Kent,
I think adding a "stop" action would indeed help and yes identities is a good
idea.
Regards,Reshad.
On Friday, January 13, 2023, 09:22:41 AM EST, Joe Clarke (jclarke)
wrote:
One thing I was kicking around with Mahesh is a compromise on Reshad’s problem
by adding a
On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 3:32 AM Italo Busi wrote:
> Andy, Carsten, Jürgen, Tom,
>
>
>
> Thanks for your feedbacks
>
>
>
> If I understand correctly:
>
>- Andy, Carsten and Jürgen agree that using unrestricted string for
>non-key attributes makes sense
>- Andy has a concern only about
One thing I was kicking around with Mahesh is a compromise on Reshad’s problem
by adding a “stop” action. It won’t address the organization of the
destination, but it would allow for one to express this semantic. Moreover,
the actions could be turned into identities (instead of an enum) to
Dear Chairs, all,
The new version include some text to address the issue raised by Italo
recently.
I think that it is time to consider adoption of this draft. Thanks.
Cheers,
Med
-Message d'origine-
De : internet-dra...@ietf.org
Envoyé : vendredi 13 janvier 2023 09:03
À :
Dear NETMOD WG,
This message begins a two-week WGLC for draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model-28
ending on Friday, January 27th. Here is a direct link to the HTML version of
the draft:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model-28
Positive comments, e.g., "I've
Hi Reshad,
Thank you for explaining. I share your assessment that it the model may not
be implementable in rsyslog. I also cannot fault the model nor advocate a
change. It is unknown to me how pervasive the issue may be, but the model did
go thru a WGLC before, which would've been the time
From: Benoit Claise
Sent: 12 January 2023 17:03
Hi Tom,
On 1/12/2023 5:51 PM, tom petch wrote:
> From: netmod on behalf of Benoit Claise
>
> Sent: 12 January 2023 14:45
>
> Dear all,
>
> >From the initial problem statement:
> During a WG adoption poll we have received a comment that the URL
Andy, Carsten, Jürgen, Tom,
Thanks for your feedbacks
If I understand correctly:
* Andy, Carsten and Jürgen agree that using unrestricted string for non-key
attributes makes sense
* Andy has a concern only about using unrestricted string for key
attributes and his proposal is to use
20 matches
Mail list logo
