HI Eric, > On Jan 30, 2024, at 7:04 AM, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) <[email protected]> wrote: > > Mahesh > Indeed, this was my question: why including BCP14 template when they are not > used ? 😊
I have removed in the -28 version. I just posted it. > Acee, the comment about a less trivial example was just a suggestion, feel > free to ignore it I’ve got to figure out how to so this with yanglint but it won’t be for this draft. Thanks, Acee > Regards > -éric > From: Mahesh Jethanandani <[email protected]> > Date: Tuesday, 30 January 2024 at 02:52 > To: Acee Lindem <[email protected]> > Cc: The IESG <[email protected]>, > "[email protected]" > <[email protected]>, lsr-chairs > <[email protected]>, lsr <[email protected]>, Christian Hopps > <[email protected]>, Eric Vyncke <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: Éric Vyncke's No Objection on > draft-ietf-lsr-ospfv3-extended-lsa-yang-27: (with COMMENT) > Hi Acee, > > >> On Jan 29, 2024, at 6:33 AM, Acee Lindem <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi Éric, >> >> Thanks for the review - see inline. >> >> >>> On Jan 29, 2024, at 05:19, Éric Vyncke via Datatracker <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for >>> draft-ietf-lsr-ospfv3-extended-lsa-yang-27: No Objection >>> >>> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all >>> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this >>> introductory paragraph, however.) >>> >>> >>> Please refer to >>> https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ >>> >>> for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. >>> >>> >>> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lsr-ospfv3-extended-lsa-yang/ >>> >>> >>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> COMMENT: >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> Thanks for the work done in this document. >>> >>> Like id-nits, I wonder why BCP14 template is used in the main body (in >>> addition >>> to its occurence in the YANG module itself) as there are occurence of >>> normative >>> language neither in the main body nor in the YANG module. Please consider >>> removing the 2 occurence of the BCP 14 template. >> >> >> This is normal for YANG model documents. I’d like to hear from OPS ADs on >> this if it is changing. > > The point Eric is bringing up is that you are not using any of the key words > from BCP 14 like MUST, MUST NOT etc. Why do you need the include the template > in that case. > Cheers. > > >> >> >> >> >>> >>> Should there be a less trivial example ? >> >> >> Operational state examples are not easy to produce without access to >> implementations. I’ve got it on my list of things to do to look at the >> available tools but it isn’t going to happen for this document. >> >> Thanks, >> Acee >> >> >> >> >>> >>> >> > > Mahesh Jethanandani > [email protected] _______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
