IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [netmod] intended status of the tree diagram document

Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> Thu, 07 December 2017 22:13 UTC

Return-Path: <lberger@labn.net>
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 3CA851294F3 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Dec 2017 14:13:30 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-2.8, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (768-bit key) header.d=labn.net
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 PPiEvRCb_G9y for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Dec 2017 14:13:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gproxy9-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com (gproxy9-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com [69.89.20.122]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A067B1294F0 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Dec 2017 14:13:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from cmgw2 (unknown [10.0.90.83]) by gproxy9.mail.unifiedlayer.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 361AD1E066E for <netmod@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Dec 2017 15:13:28 -0700 (MST)
Received: from box313.bluehost.com ([69.89.31.113]) by cmgw2 with id jADQ1w00r2SSUrH01ADTGZ; Thu, 07 Dec 2017 15:13:28 -0700
X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.2 cv=doKrMxo4 c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=h1BC+oY+fLhyFmnTBx92Jg==:117 a=h1BC+oY+fLhyFmnTBx92Jg==:17 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=xqWC_Br6kY4A:10 a=ocR9PWop10UA:10 a=48vgC7mUAAAA:8 a=3LwNzHvKK53Cd23OwP8A:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=w1C3t2QeGrPiZgrLijVG:22
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=labn.net; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version :Date:Message-ID:Cc:From:References:To:Subject:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=LOPyLkeDuq9Qn3rIiDAszcUVPyfuHxGOh5igDMflPv4=; b=KXw5Y/NvlbpkhFSlxVn0INp6FO 1N1j+l0fvUl66nAc++Ef+aaGGRpkHZDZvZesM3e9srMp4jeItumBePGvqVeXlYmDnaCQv52rtVkLF 9tQgvypSkqcgaWLm0mwgC8hJC;
Received: from pool-100-15-86-101.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([100.15.86.101]:47242 helo=[IPv6:::1]) by box313.bluehost.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <lberger@labn.net>) id 1eN4Q0-002MUj-8o; Thu, 07 Dec 2017 15:13:24 -0700
To: netmod@ietf.org, Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net>, Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>, Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
References: <20171115.135818.591114714397486064.mbj@tail-f.com> <69960a0c-1441-ec80-d8fb-287d8c474300@labn.net> <20171117065424.ccnx3dufs7e5abk3@elstar.local>
From: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
Message-ID: <1e71a94a-d07a-0c0b-bc02-56aefdf19329@labn.net>
Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2017 17:13:21 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20171117065424.ccnx3dufs7e5abk3@elstar.local>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - box313.bluehost.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - labn.net
X-BWhitelist: no
X-Source-IP: 100.15.86.101
X-Exim-ID: 1eN4Q0-002MUj-8o
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-Source-Sender: pool-100-15-86-101.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([IPv6:::1]) [100.15.86.101]:47242
X-Source-Auth: lberger@labn.net
X-Email-Count: 2
X-Source-Cap: bGFibm1vYmk7bGFibm1vYmk7Ym94MzEzLmJsdWVob3N0LmNvbQ==
X-Local-Domain: yes
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/wGDuUsMFwvvBmABpGx03DlMvVgg>
Subject: Re: [netmod] intended status of the tree diagram document
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: Thu, 07 Dec 2017 22:13:30 -0000

Hi Juergen,

    Sorry for the slow response, I missed this message.

Circling back to this discussion made me go revisit RFC2026.  Based on
all the factors/discussions I agree  that standards track isn't quite
right for this document, but I also think informational isn't quite
right either.  I do think BCP would as described in RFC2026 fits.  This
said, I think it would be good to hear from at least Kent (as Chair) and
Benoit (as AD) if they agree/disagree with publishing as a BCP.

Kent, Benoit?

Thanks,

Lou

On 11/17/2017 1:54 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
> Lou,
>
> right now, the document says standards track, Martin's proposal was to
> move to informational. So how do I parse "I think you are correct.  We
> should leave as is."?
>
> /js
>
> On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 07:36:58AM +0800, Lou Berger wrote:
>> Martin,
>> 	I think you are correct.  We should leave as is.
>>
>> I'm sure Kent/the document Shepherd makes sure whatever we do is right
>> before publication in any case.
>>
>> Lou (as contributor)
>>
>> On 11/15/2017 8:58 PM, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Currently, draft-ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams has intended status
>>> Standards Track.  I think I heard during the meeting today that it
>>> ought to be Informational.  I think this makes sense.  It would then
>>> imply that other standards track documents will have the tree diagram
>>> document as an informative reference.
>>>
>>> Should we make this change?
>>>
>>>
>>> /martin
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> netmod mailing list
>>> netmod@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> netmod mailing list
>> netmod@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email