Re: [netmod] YANG Versioning: Key Issue #1 - Allow NBC changes in YANG 1.0 & YANG 1.1 or not?

Respectively submitted for your consideration, Having listened to the pros/cons of this issue at IETF 117, the mailing list, and some of the calls... IMHO... Option 1 is the option that best reflects current practice in several standards bodies and provides a way forward that is the least

Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-haas-netmod-unknown-bits-02

I don’t support adoption as I think this solution to the problem of receiving unknown bits is excessive and the fact that it is Non-Backward Compatible (NBC) change to remove the unknown bits once they are defined. Rather, just add an optional read-only unknown-foo-bits leaf of type

Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-haas-netmod-unknown-bits-02

I support adoption. Sent from my iPhone > On Aug 3, 2023, at 2:02 PM, Kent Watsen wrote: > > NETMOD WG, > > This email begins a 2-week adoption poll for: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-haas-netmod-unknown-bits/02 > > There is no known IPR on this draft (IPR call). > > Please

Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-haas-netmod-unknown-bits-02

Support this work! > On Aug 3, 2023, at 11:02 AM, Kent Watsen wrote: > > NETMOD WG, > > This email begins a 2-week adoption poll for: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-haas-netmod-unknown-bits/02 > > > There is no

[netmod] Adoption poll for draft-haas-netmod-unknown-bits-02

NETMOD WG, This email begins a 2-week adoption poll for: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-haas-netmod-unknown-bits/02 There is no known IPR on this draft (IPR call ). Please voice your support or technical