Subject: Re: [netmod] IETF91 NETMOD agenda ?

From: Randy Presuhn <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2014 15:00:29 -0800 (GMT-08:00)

Hi -

>From: Benoit Claise <[email-masked]>
>Sent: Nov 4, 2014 2:29 PM
>To: Mahesh Jethanandani <[email-masked]>, "Thomas D. Nadeau" <[email-masked]>
>Cc: "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>, "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>
>Subject: Re: [netmod] IETF91 NETMOD agenda ?
...
>Here's the list of drafts that have normative or unclassified references 
>to YANG:
...
>That could be a lot of updates...
>I believe we should focus on the YANG models that don't have an existing WG.
...

>From the peanut gallery...

Though I won't be there, I'd suggest an even more restrictive criterion
for allocating time:  spend time only on those aspects of models where
there is serious disagreement (even after consulting a Yang doctor)
about how to model something or where the modelers have come to believe
YANG is somehow deficient.  If there aren't in-depth modeling / language
issues requiring face-to-face discussion, don't waste meeting time
on the document.

Randy