Re: [netmod] Confirming draft-ietf-netmod-module-tags-03 consensus call

joel jaeggli <> Wed, 28 November 2018 18:47 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1FDB128A6E; Wed, 28 Nov 2018 10:47:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9N16_HkjEjtI; Wed, 28 Nov 2018 10:47:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::42b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9F422127B92; Wed, 28 Nov 2018 10:47:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id q1so10606655pfi.5; Wed, 28 Nov 2018 10:47:23 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=ydON4NP8uco80j5bR2Q1olgsATzmIL6mpXz6s250bPE=; b=uAMcGJyqm9GUQB19UJ66hmB81G6ZpsMEyPyuCbpLYRJ1cJh/39xRB/7IDlXapuxuP+ cFlSArGDjUsNSaHmwq6ngAY9eBFg+biWLUMvG37+NW0f1IHgqikeFnq385yIIEncn5tS mr2hJ67hRRUwKyM2M6O0Zc9ZD9eHEfysGUFYw+ChmiUNZZ1Vod8Ex1R9NMFzhM8dOSan jNCsq9RXgf6DSFogyltFoR0d5RvblkYQZPrMAgGT5RFGPR4N8wyxMSOMSBNQlBE7GnsU OTrW1tpxDhBzinAhiBKhtbFd/REU8wG9R1DLX0B4Zy4m4gFpikauiED0XfEzXJho4omH xwZA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=ydON4NP8uco80j5bR2Q1olgsATzmIL6mpXz6s250bPE=; b=NZFhE2DuHSlrvBy4vmKcQTotoSATJkhLsSXMbbSO7gwNBbXJjfuTQCJkfr4ugfI4Nx xQqaFTMz37m5jRx2NpMZF7utFgNBbMRWSxdlJ8VGy3xGqoqbHvOwP4g/84cUqav3bCu4 N3xHNQAjADX261Sfhf643nNicbrsLCmqobVlMaOua8qraY3XL/p3L5RyxJ8TxUxoZWUj d33ma4V8dLLghuEW2zDIO8UWFNIBkzjNWMdi6QMZAmxfBnlQf8COZ8I5cweHgQjkFQ3R +Rta4h+enXvZU4/6RfVh6GNiIQ8Ahs0E/ndReWW/Rdtq9c7LCaME8D8fRZlGCudvB3Ug hV6g==
X-Gm-Message-State: AA+aEWbHxsncL+dOfS8Tk8CecFrVYQS4hPTDnWku55OMV7K1yDzZHU8V l48cqDeeVUJuABVdwWQP+wg=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AFSGD/WcK3JwUrG+KCKGHR6u18sVj+JY3qTMAv3QbJadcFN+C5JzCJX0xICUQrl+9NiPvcR71XM1Sw==
X-Received: by 2002:a63:de46:: with SMTP id y6mr34085805pgi.198.1543430842881; Wed, 28 Nov 2018 10:47:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2620:11a:c081:20:7c90:350:6a48:2cdd? ([2620:11a:c081:20:7c90:350:6a48:2cdd]) by with ESMTPSA id e128sm9566391pfe.67.2018. (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 28 Nov 2018 10:47:22 -0800 (PST)
From: joel jaeggli <>
Message-Id: <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_7847B016-29FF-481A-A68D-943D6AA7AA07"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.1 \(3445.101.1\))
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2018 10:47:18 -0800
In-Reply-To: <>
Cc: NETMOD Working Group <>,
To: Joel Jaeggli <>
References: <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.101.1)
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [netmod] Confirming draft-ietf-netmod-module-tags-03 consensus call
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETMOD WG list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2018 18:47:26 -0000

This confirms the completion of this period.

I think we can conclude the following:

The Question of whether better guidance for usage can be applied was raised and discussed. Robert Wilton proposed some text which seems both reasonable and which does not change the substance of the draft.

The Question of where tags reside was raised, it appears resolved.

From the meeting, there remains the request for the addition of an example.

Kent - can we add an example

Chris - what format would you like it in.

Kent: xml/netconf or json/restconf is fine, just identify which is used.

On this basis I think we can do a writeup and forward a draft 04 to the IESG for review / IETF last call.


> On Nov 12, 2018, at 08:46, joel jaeggli <> wrote:
> During the Thursday nov 8 session of netmod, we asked if there were any objections to the publication of the Draft-03 version of draft-ietf-netmod-module-tags which addresses comments and concerns raised during the WGLC. In the meeting there were none. This commences a comment period to confirm that call. As this follows closely on the heels of the IETF 103 meeting we’ll let the call run through Monday the 26th of November. 
> Thanks
> Joel
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list