Re: [Netconf] draft-ietf-netconf-monitoring-09 last call comments from js

["Mark Scott" <markscot at nortel.com>]

Martin,

Related to the reply I posted to Juergen and Randy on this thread:

By descriptive text I assume we mean only the text for each parm in sec
2 specifically.  In which case are we effectively saying that 'see yang
module for details' is sufficient for sec 2?

If not, can someone help me better understand which descriptive text
belongs in the yang module (to augment what is already there) and which
should remain in sec 2 of the RFC?

Mark


-----Original Message-----
From: netconf-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:netconf-bounces at ietf.org] On
Behalf Of Martin Bjorklund
Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2009 10:04 AM
To: phil at juniper.net
Cc: netconf at ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Netconf] draft-ietf-netconf-monitoring-09 last call
comments from js

Phil Shafer <phil at juniper.net> wrote:
> And given the number of mib implementors that seem to not read the
> rfc, just the mib, I'd vote to have all real text live within the
> yang module.

I also agree.  For this particular document, it started out with an
XSD model, and having all the text in the XSD was not very readable.
But now that we moved to YANG, I agree that descriptive text should be
moved into the description clauses.


/martin
_______________________________________________
Netconf mailing list
Netconf at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf