[netmod] Protocol Action: 'A YANG Data Model for Interface Management' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-netmod-rfc7223bis-03.txt)

The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org> Fri, 12 January 2018 23:08 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Cc: netmod-chairs@ietf.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, Joel Jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>, netmod@ietf.org, joelja@bogus.com, bclaise@cisco.com, draft-ietf-netmod-rfc7223bis@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <151579853761.21825.17655942416834108037.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2018 15:08:57 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/ZjbTtU_Vbvkks12CRauJye8BuZs>
Subject: [netmod] Protocol Action: 'A YANG Data Model for Interface Management' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-netmod-rfc7223bis-03.txt)

The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'A YANG Data Model for Interface Management'
  (draft-ietf-netmod-rfc7223bis-03.txt) as Proposed Standard

This document is the product of the Network Modeling Working Group.

The IESG contact persons are Warren Kumari and Benoit Claise.

A URL of this Internet Draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-rfc7223bis/





Technical Summary

   This document defines a YANG [RFC7950] data model for the management
   of network interfaces.  It is expected that interface-type-specific
   data models augment the generic interfaces data model defined in this
   document.

   The data model includes configuration data and state data (status
   information and counters for the collection of statistics).
   This version revised version of the interfaces data model supports 
   the Network Management Datastore Architecture (NMDA)
   [I-D.ietf-netmod-revised-datastores].

Working Group Summary

   Was there anything in the WG process that is worth noting?
   For example, was there controversy about particular points 
   or were there decisions where the consensus was
   particularly rough? 

Document Quality

Working Group last call commenced on  28 Nov 2017  and completed 
14 Dec  2017. Changes made to the document to produce -01 were 
largely editorial.

Personnel

Joel Jaeggli is the document shepherd, Benoit Claise is responsible AD.

[netmod] Protocol Action: 'A YANG Data Model for … The IESG