YANG Module Tags
draft-ietf-netmod-module-tags-10
Yes
(Ignas Bagdonas)
No Objection
Roman Danyliw
Warren Kumari
(Adam Roach)
(Deborah Brungard)
(Magnus Westerlund)
(Martin Vigoureux)
(Suresh Krishnan)
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 07 and is now closed.
Roman Danyliw
No Objection
Warren Kumari
No Objection
Ignas Bagdonas Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
(for -07)
Unknown
Adam Roach Former IESG member
(was Discuss)
No Objection
No Objection
(for -07)
Sent for earlier
Alexey Melnikov Former IESG member
(was Discuss)
No Objection
No Objection
(2020-03-17)
Sent
Thank you for addressing my DISCUSS and my apologies for taking so long.
Alissa Cooper Former IESG member
(was Discuss)
No Objection
No Objection
(2020-01-24 for -09)
Sent
Thanks for addressing my comments.
Alvaro Retana Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2019-04-11 for -07)
Sent
(1) Along the same lines of Alissa's DISCUSS, which I support. §6.1: "For standardized modules new tags MUST be assigned in the IANA registry defined below, see Section 7.2." What is a "standardized module"? It sounds like a Standards Track document, but (as Alissa pointed out) the registration policy is only IETF Review. (2) §7.1: "All YANG module tags SHOULD begin with one of the prefixes in this registry." That statement along with the text in §2.4: Any tag not starting with the prefix "ietf:", "vendor:" or "user:" is reserved for future standardization. These tag values are not invalid, but simply reserved in the context of standardization. ...seem to indicate that a tag with any format can be used. Is that true? Is that the intent? If so, then it seems to me that vendor/user tags could simply forgo the standardized prefix. I guess this is ok...it just makes me wonder about the need to even define those prefixes. (3) I'm not sure what, but I think it may be wise to give the would-be DEs for the new registry in §7.1 some more guidance on the allocation of new prefixes. The only current guidance is this: "Prefix entries in this registry should be short strings consisting of lowercase ASCII alpha-numeric characters and a final ":" character."
Barry Leiba Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2019-04-07 for -07)
Sent
I agree with Mirja’s comment about the name of the registry.
Benjamin Kaduk Former IESG member
(was Discuss)
No Objection
No Objection
(2020-03-15)
Sent
Thank you for addressing my Discuss (and comment) points!
Deborah Brungard Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -07)
Not sent
Magnus Westerlund Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -07)
Not sent
Martin Vigoureux Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -07)
Not sent
Mirja Kühlewind Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2019-04-05 for -07)
Sent
Minor comment: Maybe name the new registry "IETF YANG Module Tags" instead of "YANG Module Tags"...?
Suresh Krishnan Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -07)
Not sent