On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 7:01 AM Benoit Claise
wrote:
> Hi Andy,
>
>
> On 3/21/2024 5:35 PM, Andy Bierman wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> The presentation yesterday helped me understand the motivation for this
> work.
> Seems simple enough, but rife with unintended consequences.
> RFC 8528 does a good job of d
Hi Andy,
On 3/21/2024 5:35 PM, Andy Bierman wrote:
Hi,
The presentation yesterday helped me understand the motivation for
this work.
Seems simple enough, but rife with unintended consequences.
RFC 8528 does a good job of dealing with most of these issues, but it
is not a design-time
modifi
Hi
On 3/21/2024 4:15 PM, Jean Quilbeuf wrote:
...
Many thanks for your comments, they make a lot of sense. We will work
on it and propose a new version of the draft.
...
Thanks for the discussion. One thing that would really help me, and
perhaps others, is an example of how full include
ools must support.
> Best,
>
> Jean
>
Andy
>
>
> *From:* netmod *On Behalf Of *Andy Bierman
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 21, 2024 4:35 PM
> *To:* NetMod WG
> *Subject:* [netmod] comments on draft-jouqui-netmod-yang-full-include
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
meaning. Is there any other issue with this anydata node?
Best,
Jean
From: netmod On Behalf Of Andy Bierman
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2024 4:35 PM
To: NetMod WG
Subject: [netmod] comments on draft-jouqui-netmod-yang-full-include
Hi,
The presentation yesterday helped me understand the motivation
Hi,
The presentation yesterday helped me understand the motivation for this
work.
Seems simple enough, but rife with unintended consequences.
RFC 8528 does a good job of dealing with most of these issues, but it is
not a design-time
modification like this draft is proposing.
I would like to see t
