Hi, has there been any conclusion regarding this adoption call? We tried to address the concerns that the YANG module is a snapshot of IANA registries, but I am not sure whether we succeeded or what should be done instead. So let me summarize:
- After the publication of this document, IANA will assume the responsibility for updating the YANG module with every change to the registry. No further involvement of DNSOP WG is needed. - The aim of this I-D is to make the IANA registries available for data modelling in YANG. It explicitly doesn't try to rectify the contents of the registries, also because IANA could then hardly continue updating the YANG module on their own. Is there any real problem with this approach? Thanks, Ladislav Benno Overeinder <be...@nlnetlabs.nl> writes: > Dear DNSOP WG, > > The draft YANG Types for DNS Classes and Resource Record Types, > draft-lhotka-dnsop-iana-class-type-yang, has been presented at the IETF > 103 and IETF 104. > > During the IETF 104 meeting, the authors asked for adoption by the DNSOP > WG. The feedback from the DNSOP WG room was positive and also previous > discussions on the DNSOP mailing list (dd. 12 November 2018) were also > supportive. > > This starts a Call for Adoption for: > draft-lhotka-dnsop-iana-class-type-yang > > The draft is available here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-lhotka-dnsop-iana-class-type-yang/ > > Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for adoption > by DNSOP, and comments to the list, clearly stating your view. > > Please also indicate if you are willing to contribute text, review, etc. > > This call for adoption ends: 29 July 2019 > > Thanks, > > Benno Overeinder > DNSOP co-chair > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > DNSOP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop -- Ladislav Lhotka Head, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67 _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
