Re: [netmod] WG adoption poll

Martin Bjorklund <> Tue, 09 October 2018 10:58 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 220CB131280; Tue, 9 Oct 2018 03:58:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XiATsrW4DzPT; Tue, 9 Oct 2018 03:58:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D21F013127B; Tue, 9 Oct 2018 03:58:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (unknown []) by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AD1A81AE0428; Tue, 9 Oct 2018 12:58:23 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2018 12:58:22 +0200
Message-Id: <>
From: Martin Bjorklund <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <>
X-Mailer: Mew version 6.7 on Emacs 24.5 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [netmod] WG adoption poll
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: Tue, 09 Oct 2018 10:58:27 -0000


I still think that this draft should either be split into two, one for
specifiying the generic file format (ok with examples), and one for
"Documenting Server Capabilities", or the document should just be
about the file format (+ *examples*).

[The current document mixes the two; it's a bit as if we had "The
YANG language and a model for interfaces" as one doc...]

It is clear that the document specifies a file format for YANG
instance data, which is good.  But it is not clear if the document
intends to specify how a server should document its capabilities.

The Introduction mainly talks about why it is important to document
server capabilities.  But then AFAICT there is no normative
specification of how a server would document its capabilities.


Lou Berger <> wrote:
> All,
> This is start of a two week poll on making
> draft-lengyel-netmod-yang-instance-data-04 a working group
> document. Please send email to the list indicating "yes/support" or
> "no/do not support".  If indicating no, please state your reservations
> with the document.  If yes, please also feel free to provide comments
> you'd like to see addressed once the document is a WG document.
> The poll ends Oct 22.
> Thanks,
> Lou (and co-chairs)
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list