Skip to main content

Common YANG Data Types
draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6021-bis-03

Approval announcement
Draft of message to be sent after approval:

Announcement

From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
Cc: RFC Editor <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>,
    netmod mailing list <netmod@ietf.org>,
    netmod chair <netmod-chairs@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: CORRECTED Protocol Action: 'Common YANG Data Types' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6021-bis-03.txt)

The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'Common YANG Data Types'
  (draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6021-bis-03.txt) as Proposed Standard

This document is the product of the NETCONF Data Modeling Language
Working Group.

The IESG contact persons are Benoit Claise and Joel Jaeggli.

A URL of this Internet Draft is:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6021-bis/


Ballot Text

Technical Summary (set of documents)
      
 draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6021-bis-00

 This document introduces a collection of common data types to be used
 with the YANG data modeling language.  This document obsoletes RFC
 6021.

 draft-ietf-netmod-iana-if-type-04

 This document defines the initial version of the iana-if-type and
 iana-afn-safi YANG modules, for interface type definitions, and Address
 Family Numbers (AFN) and Subsequent Address Family Identifiers (SAFI),
 respectively.

 draft-ietf-netmod-interfaces-cfg-09

 This document defines a YANG data model for the management of network
 interfaces.  It is expected that interface type specific data models
 augment the generic interfaces data model defined in this document.
 
 draft-ietf-netmod-ip-cfg-09

 This document defines a YANG data model for management of IP
 implementations.

Working Group Summary

 The normal WG process was followed and the documents reflect WG
 consensus with nothing special worth mentioning.

Document Quality

 This set of documents received extensive review within the working group
 and ample time was spent to review and reconsider all design choices.
 The working group also reached out to the IP directorate and received
 additional review from Dave Thaler.



RFC Editor Note