Paul Wouters writes:
> On Thu, 10 Oct 2019, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>
>> They should not actually be reading the RFC but get the latest revision of
>> the module from this page:
>>
>> https://www.iana.org/assignments/yang-parameters/yang-parameters.xhtml
>
> You are asking for text to go into an
I have some comments on this draft.
I’m particularly concerned about the extremely common use-case where a DNS
proxy is used in front of the actual resolver; this is the case for many home
routers/CPEs, particularly those provided by ISPs. They tend to give out DNS
via DHCP on a private IP addr
On 10 Oct 2019, at 09:55, Paul Wouters wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Oct 2019, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>
>> They should not actually be reading the RFC but get the latest revision of
>> the module from this page:
>>
>> https://www.iana.org/assignments/yang-parameters/yang-parameters.xhtml
>
> You are as
On Fri, 2019-10-11 at 10:03 -0400, Joe Abley wrote:
> On 10 Oct 2019, at 09:55, Paul Wouters wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 10 Oct 2019, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> >
> > > They should not actually be reading the RFC but get the latest revision of
> > > the module from this page:
> > >
> > > https://www.ian
On Fri, 11 Oct 2019, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
My suggestion was a link the proper IANA registries, which _are_ updated
by other RFCs to place things into obsolete/deprecated and receive new
entries based on other new RFCs.
As you said the implementors need to go to the IANA/YANG module place, a
l
Please note that this document was originally Last Called on 2019-09-18 as
Informational --
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-announce/RmSJ_aEt_522jT9rqEYmALxCvag
It was originally intended that the document text be copied into the
status-change document -- but, that doesn't work, becau
