Tom, I've not hit "publish" yet...
> On Oct 21, 2021, at 7:39 AM, t petch <ie...@btconnect.com> wrote: > > On 20/10/2021 22:00, Jeffrey Haas wrote: >> >>> On Oct 20, 2021, at 4:58 PM, Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanand...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>> On Oct 20, 2021, at 1:53 PM, Jeffrey Haas <jh...@pfrc.org >>>> <mailto:jh...@pfrc.org>> wrote: >>>> >>>> There's also a note in the nits that the security considerations netconf >>>> boilerplate is pointing to older RFCs, but I haven't seen updated >>>> boilerplate issued? >>> >>> See Section 3.7.1 of RFC 8407 here >>> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8407#section-3.7.1>. >> >> Thank you, Mahesh. >> >> Addressing this would close the remaining nits. > > Manwhile ... > > Unless and until you register with IANA, you do not have a YANG module! Is there a bit of IANA boilerplate we're missing for the yang module? > > The web reference is ood and insecure Previously discussed and blessed. > > The title in the 'reference' clause is not that of the I-D Which reference? The "RFC YYYY"? > > The text in the running footing is so long that it merges with prefix and > suffix thereof This one will get resolved via RFC publication along with the RFC Editor. > > YANG augment are commonly accompanied by a 'when' to restrict their > application. The augmentations are gated on if-feature. Is that not-sufficient? In the case where the feature is supported, these augmentations are unconditionally expected to be present. -- Jeff
