A YANG Data Model for Scheduled Attributes
draft-ietf-tvr-schedule-yang-12

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: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-tvr-schedule-yang@ietf.org, gunter@vandevelde.cc, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, tony.li@tony.li, tvr-chairs@ietf.org, tvr@ietf.org
Subject: Protocol Action: 'A YANG Data Model for Scheduled Attributes' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-tvr-schedule-yang-12.txt)

The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'A YANG Data Model for Scheduled Attributes'
  (draft-ietf-tvr-schedule-yang-12.txt) as Proposed Standard

This document is the product of the Time-Variant Routing Working Group.

The IESG contact persons are Gunter Van de Velde, Jim Guichard and Ketan
Talaulikar.

A URL of this Internet-Draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tvr-schedule-yang/

Ballot Text

Technical Summary

   The YANG model in this document includes three modules, and can be
   used to manage network resources and topologies with scheduled
   attributes, such as predictable link loss and link connectivity as a
   function of time.  The intent is to have this information be utilized
   by Time-Variant Routing systems.

Working Group Summary

   Was there anything in the WG process that is worth noting?
   For example, was there controversy about particular points 
   or were there decisions where the consensus was
   particularly rough? 

The document reached broad agreement and there was no controversy

Document Quality

   Are there existing implementations of the protocol?  Have a 
   significant number of vendors indicated their plan to
   implement the specification?  Are there any reviewers that
   merit special mention as having done a thorough review,
   e.g., one that resulted in important changes or a
   conclusion that the document had no substantive issues?  If
   there was a MIB Doctor, Media Type, or other Expert Review,
   what was its course (briefly)?  In the case of a Media Type
   Review, on what date was the request posted?

This is not a protocol document. No public documented implementations.
The modules have been verfied using pyang, yanglint, and yangvalidator. 
The modules comply with RFC 8342.

Personnel

   The Document Shepherd for this document is Tony Li. The Responsible Area
   Director is Gunter Van de Velde.

IANA Note

  IANA OK

RFC Editor Note