IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Netconf] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6241 (3821)

"Bert Wijnen (IETF)" <bertietf@bwijnen.net> Fri, 13 December 2013 08:43 UTC

Return-Path: <bertietf@bwijnen.net>
X-Original-To: netconf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netconf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 518261ADFA6 for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Dec 2013 00:43:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0RReNxWTWjqo for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Dec 2013 00:43:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from koko.ripe.net (koko.ripe.net [193.0.19.72]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9ADEA1AE1EF for <netconf@ietf.org>; Fri, 13 Dec 2013 00:42:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from nene.ripe.net ([193.0.23.10]) by koko.ripe.net with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <bertietf@bwijnen.net>) id 1VrOKY-0006rv-1J; Fri, 13 Dec 2013 09:42:43 +0100
Received: from kitten.ipv6.ripe.net ([2001:67c:2e8:1::c100:1f0] helo=[IPv6:::1]) by nene.ripe.net with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <bertietf@bwijnen.net>) id 1VrOKX-00016m-NQ; Fri, 13 Dec 2013 09:42:41 +0100
Message-ID: <52AAC886.6000000@bwijnen.net>
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 09:42:46 +0100
From: "Bert Wijnen (IETF)" <bertietf@bwijnen.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ietfdbh <ietfdbh@comcast.net>, 'Andy Bierman' <andy@yumaworks.com>, 'Jonathan Hansford' <Jonathan@hansfords.net>, 'Rob Enns' <rob.enns@gmail.com>, 'joel jaeggli' <joelja@bogus.com>, 'Netconf' <netconf@ietf.org>
References: <52A7244A.4090006@bwijnen.net> <20131210.153651.1182516105923318005.mbj@tail-f.com> <CABCOCHQfbsz8AHY0SRs+TOcmARenvTQ2Nn_JtAkynexxh-wozw@mail.gmail.com> <cb13626ae792344d299ac437a00c906b@imap.plus.net> <CABCOCHS4BSR=46xcnWx02DQtXm6rtbJ69vHXwO9gReOPrist-g@mail.gmail.com> <7de2779d935aae627d3c3b030466b1dc@imap.plus.net> <CABCOCHQCayT6UXuh_k9FSZH4iRCoPP7RoBwar1RKAFVM-3T0SQ@mail.gmail.com> <80d82e162c729b696be4ddd23dc624d2@imap.plus.net> <CABCOCHT=2SRjhXwrGwZK=7QbkVkKhhSv8WWXwoGr83r1JC43kA@mail.gmail.com> <004e01cef75e$7bb29250$7317b6f0$@comcast.net> <20131212201319.GC81732@elstar.local>
In-Reply-To: <20131212201319.GC81732@elstar.local>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-RIPE-Spam-Level: --
X-RIPE-Spam-Report: Spam Total Points: -2.9 points pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- ------------------------------------ -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000]
X-RIPE-Signature: 86ab03e524994f79ca2c75a176445dd42898456639c3cb22877c0423168ed170
Subject: Re: [Netconf] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6241 (3821)
X-BeenThere: netconf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Network Configuration WG mailing list <netconf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netconf>, <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netconf/>
List-Post: <mailto:netconf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf>, <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 08:43:21 -0000

Inline

On 12/12/13 9:13 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
> I believe people do agree on the intended behaviour; there is perhaps
> less agreement on how to describe it better. Jonathan's proposal in
> the errata helps somewhat but I believe to really describe this well,
> we actually need to discuss the various situations in more detail.

If we indeed believe that we agree on the behaviour and IF we believe we can
make the text to describe that better, then I propose that the document authors
sit together to come uo with a proposed new text that we can then discuss
on this list.

Bert

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email