Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model-20

"Clyde Wildes (cwildes)" <cwildes@cisco.com> Wed, 21 February 2018 21:21 UTC

Return-Path: <cwildes@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C531F124BFA for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Feb 2018 13:21:30 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.531
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.531 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
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 ZQA7Dp0r8NBO for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Feb 2018 13:21:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com [173.37.86.74]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DB99212420B for <netmod@ietf.org>; Wed, 21 Feb 2018 13:21:28 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=4508; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1519248088; x=1520457688; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=1WSbc5LF4QX29DDnnHQbxRIA0OYxBcqhYvpniK8AbDg=; b=ijovn0YPqQAuQvG1gptrCNltfJP/SKm24elNrWEX/Fjf0Ook4+yWYiTn 37e4SIj+GCkX8yAmgN0P5sxjYJ5n/qiR5fgoggujNiILL5O8EV3SEDERC QC7igIIAcF+LWHWd23F9KrMe6j4M72AHQf/iNYQR+HNWAsA5Z1kq11Jgr g=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0BIAQBi4o1a/40NJK1dGQEBAQEBAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?BAQEBAQcBAQEBAYNPZnAoCoNeiiWNd4ICgReWShSCAgoYC4RCTwIagl5UGAE?= =?us-ascii?q?CAQEBAQEBAmsohSMBAQEDAQEBIRE6CxACAQgOBAYCAiMDAgICJQsUAQIOAgQ?= =?us-ascii?q?BDQUbigAIEKpzgieIeYITAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBHYEPhAKCJ4F?= =?us-ascii?q?XgWcpgwWDMAEBgTmDTzGCNAWKcplJCQKIJY1mDoISZ4VCi3yXeQIRGQGBOwE?= =?us-ascii?q?fOYFRcBU6KgGCGAmEbXiLe4EZAQEB?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.47,375,1515456000"; d="scan'208";a="348368688"
Received: from alln-core-8.cisco.com ([173.36.13.141]) by rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 21 Feb 2018 21:21:28 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-013.cisco.com (xch-aln-013.cisco.com [173.36.7.23]) by alln-core-8.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w1LLLSoV009559 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 21 Feb 2018 21:21:28 GMT
Received: from xch-aln-015.cisco.com (173.36.7.25) by XCH-ALN-013.cisco.com (173.36.7.23) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1320.4; Wed, 21 Feb 2018 15:21:27 -0600
Received: from xch-aln-015.cisco.com ([173.36.7.25]) by XCH-ALN-015.cisco.com ([173.36.7.25]) with mapi id 15.00.1320.000; Wed, 21 Feb 2018 15:21:27 -0600
From: "Clyde Wildes (cwildes)" <cwildes@cisco.com>
To: Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net>, "t.petch" <ietfc@btconnect.com>, "Yaron Sheffer" <yaronf.ietf@gmail.com>, Ron Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net>
CC: NETMOD Working Group <netmod@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model-20
Thread-Index: AQHTpZZfUtsO+32u9kKn7+BDeXhjPqOklbWAgAj1UFmAAGiiAIAB2Z6A
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2018 21:21:27 +0000
Message-ID: <E859CBB0-CCA7-4E38-909C-9639E9BCB01B@cisco.com>
References: <d4a73a00-dce2-2f11-29d0-0eb34920fd3f@cisco.com> <922E608D-951A-459A-B515-B53834C805C1@juniper.net> <022001d3aa6a$c31895e0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <A8296BCA-A33F-44EB-AB94-706A7D4B5BE7@juniper.net>
In-Reply-To: <A8296BCA-A33F-44EB-AB94-706A7D4B5BE7@juniper.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.154.131.4]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <5FE70F1397E9AE419356C55B36F2C8A6@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/kwvmd3_wGgwZ9JYwvR2rrL7Is2I>
Subject: Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model-20
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETMOD WG list <netmod.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netmod/>
List-Post: <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2018 21:21:31 -0000

Kent, Tom, Yaron, and Ron,

A new version of the draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model has been published that addresses your concerns.

Thanks,

Clyde

On 2/20/18, 9:06 AM, "netmod on behalf of Kent Watsen" <netmod-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of kwatsen@juniper.net> wrote:

    
    
    
    > Kent
    > 
    > You illustrate beautifully the problem I would like a solution to.
    >
    > The current thinking AFAICT is that tree-diagrams
    > should be an Informative Reference.
    >
    > Therefore, the RFC Editor will not hold publication until an RFC number
    > is assigned.
    > 
    > Therefore, a note asking the I-D reference to be updated to reflect the
    > assigned RFC number is null - the RFC can be published with the
    > reference as an i-d and not as an RFC which is what I expect the RFC
    > Editor to do.
    > 
    > QED
    
    
    Except I know that this draft will be stuck in MISREF state and tree-diagrams
    will in fact be assigned an RFC number by the time this draft is published.
    
    K.
    
    
    > Note that this is not the case of a Normative i-d reference being buried
    > in the YANG module and not being.noticed by the RFC Editor; that problem
    > I am content with.
    >
    >
    >Tom Petch
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    >
    > Please also address these issues when posting -21 to address Benoit's
    issues.  Please post -21 ASAP as Benoit has already placed this draft on
    the IESG telechat in a couple weeks.
    >
    > Thanks,
    > Kent // shepherd
    >
    >
    > On 2/14/18, 8:18 AM, "netmod on behalf of Benoit Claise"
    <netmod-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:netmod-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of
    bclaise@cisco.com<mailto:bclaise@cisco.com>> wrote:
    >
    > Dear all,
    >
    > - the draft is NMDA compliant, right? It should be mentioned.
    > Ex: draft-ietf-netmod-rfc7223bis-03, in the abstract and intro
    >
    >    The YANG model in this document conforms to the Network Management
    >
    >    Datastore Architecture defined in
    I-D.ietf-netmod-revised-datastores.
    >
    >
    > - As mentioned in the writeup, [I-D.ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams]
    should be an informative reference, not normative.
    >
    > - Editorial:
    > OLD:
    > This draft addresses the common leafs
    > NEW:
    > This document addresses the common leafs
    >
    > Please publish a new version asap.
    > In the mean time, I'm sending this draft to IETF LC.
    >
    > Regards, Benoit
    >
    >
    >
    
    
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    --------
    
    
    > _______________________________________________
    > netmod mailing list
    > netmod@ietf.org
    > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_netmod&d=DwICaQ&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=9zkP0xnJUvZGJ9EPoOH7Yhqn2gsBYaGTvjISlaJdcZo&m=cJ7MVnQVc1hgxpVF7oYiVn6Rbm-Qf2dDyrfYhL-s9io&s=u0Hn9GkO-B0jUGm1MnIQ4x4AgIZNXHBIaZhTPmt3dC8&e=
    >
    
    
    
    _______________________________________________
    netmod mailing list
    netmod@ietf.org
    https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod