Re: [netmod] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC8342 (5362)

Ignas Bagdonas <ibagdona@gmail.com> Thu, 17 May 2018 06:13 UTC

To: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, mbj@tail-f.com, j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de, phil@juniper.net, kwatsen@juniper.net, rwilton@cisco.com, warren@kumari.net, joelja@bogus.com, lberger@labn.net
Cc: rohitrranade@huawei.com, netmod@ietf.org
References: <20180517042534.5E4C7B813FA@rfc-editor.org>
From: Ignas Bagdonas <ibagdona@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <d4e70ba2-34e0-0eab-7cd2-4c2783137f9e@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 07:12:59 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20180517042534.5E4C7B813FA@rfc-editor.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-GB
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/u6QoG3U6iqKIrbxQvYgde_yQgjQ>
Subject: Re: [netmod] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC8342 (5362)
Precedence: list

Hi there,

Reading the text, this errata appears to be correct - the previous 
obsoleted versions had separate branches, not the new NMDA based ones.

Authors, would you object to this?

Thank you.

Ignas



On 17/05/2018 05:25, RFC Errata System wrote:
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC8342,
> "Network Management Datastore Architecture (NMDA)".
>
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5362
>
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Editorial
> Reported by: Rohit R Ranade <rohitrranade@huawei.com>
>
> Section: 2
>
> Original Text
> -------------
> The convention adopted by the interfaces
>     data model [RFC8343] and the IP data model [RFC8344] was to use two
>     separate branches rooted at the root of the data tree: one branch for
>     configuration data objects and one branch for operational state data
>     objects.
>
>
> Corrected Text
> --------------
> The convention adopted by the interfaces
>     data model [RFC7223] and the IP data model [RFC7277] was to use two
>     separate branches rooted at the root of the data tree: one branch for
>     configuration data objects and one branch for operational state data
>     objects.
>
>
> Notes
> -----
> The duplication of definition and separation of operational state data and configuration data happened in RFC7223 and RFC7277. RFC8343 and RFC8344 have corrected this using NMDA architecture
>
> Instructions:
> -------------
> This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please
> use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
> rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party
> can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.
>
> --------------------------------------
> RFC8342 (draft-ietf-netmod-revised-datastores-10)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : Network Management Datastore Architecture (NMDA)
> Publication Date    : March 2018
> Author(s)           : M. Bjorklund, J. Schoenwaelder, P. Shafer, K. Watsen, R. Wilton
> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> Source              : Network Modeling
> Area                : Operations and Management
> Stream              : IETF
> Verifying Party     : IESG

Re: [netmod] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC8342 … Ignas Bagdonas