RE: [YANG] new pyang errors

Juergen responded to me:
>
> On Fri, Jan 25, 2008 at 01:05:00PM +0100, Bert Wijnen wrote:
>
> > > We consider this conformance mechanism to belong to step to in
> > > the DML. AFAIK it is not really used in SNMP either.
>
> [...]
>
> > But other than during early SNMP interoperability tests in the mid-1990s
> > I have never seen it used much (if at all).
> > So we should learn from this and think hard before we fall into the
> > same trap of designing mechanisms that no-one uses.
>
> Perhaps a clarification: We are not saying conformance mechanisms are
> not useful. We just like to postpone them to the second phase of YANG
> since conformance mechanisms are not needed to get started and we like
> to keep the YANG effort reasonably scoped so that we have a chance to
> complete what we started in reasonable amounts of time.
>

I understood that. And I am OK with postponing such work to a possible
2nd phase.  Appology if I gave the impression that I wanted it
to be addressed now. On the contrary, I was asking for reflection first
and to not quickly design such a feature without first understanding
why the mechanism we developed for MIB modules did not work (or did
not get deployed).

Bert
> /js

_______________________________________________
YANG mailing list
YANG@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yang