From nobody Tue Sep 6 20:46:38 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtg-yang-coord@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtg-yang-coord@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE3CA12B092 for ; Tue, 6 Sep 2016 20:46:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 4.514 X-Spam-Level: **** X-Spam-Status: No, score=4.514 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.886, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.922, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_FAIL=0.001, URIBL_GREY=0.424] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GijtiE572kXq for ; Tue, 6 Sep 2016 20:46:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sout.wanadoo.co.uk (sout3.wanadoo.co.uk [193.252.22.226]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5227212B090 for ; Tue, 6 Sep 2016 20:46:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zyfyec.org ([91.217.60.123]) by mwinf5d58 with ME id gTmQ1t00A2fY9GB03TmV75; Wed, 07 Sep 2016 05:46:33 +0200 X-ME-Helo: zyfyec.org X-ME-Auth: ZWxlYW5vcl9oZXJ6YmVyZ0BvcmFuZ2UubmV0 X-ME-Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2016 05:46:33 +0200 X-ME-IP: 91.217.60.123 From: prodaja@mail135-21.atl141.mandrillapp.com To: "benjid" , "bequests" , "Hans Petter Holen" , "Rtg-yang-coord" , "berlin" Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2016 06:46:23 +0300 Message-ID: <00008fb4cf98$9e1c930c$98642028$@queuefull.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0017_0116035B.4A0F6BFA" Thread-Index: AdIQhOFGICvSVOrtBdJSeuxknTDMKg== X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.6353 Content-Language: en-ca Archived-At: Subject: [Rtg-yang-coord] have you ever seen something like that? X-BeenThere: rtg-yang-coord@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "\"List to discuss coordination between the Routing related YANG models\"" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2016 03:46:37 -0000 This is a multipart message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0017_0116035B.4A0F6BFA Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi! Have you ever seen something that awesome? You've got to take a look Best wishes, prodaja@mail135-21.atl141.mandrillapp.com ------=_NextPart_000_0017_0116035B.4A0F6BFA Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<= span lang=3DEN-US>Hi!

Have you ever seen something that awesome? You've got to= take a look http://s= tangizospu.h2ooh.com/aeihtn

Best wishes, prodaja@mail135-21.atl141.mandrillap= p.com

------=_NextPart_000_0017_0116035B.4A0F6BFA-- From nobody Tue Sep 27 10:14:35 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtg-yang-coord@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtg-yang-coord@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4CBE12B2C3; Tue, 27 Sep 2016 10:14:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -16.836 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-16.836 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.316, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kFBq-Nay5-xw; Tue, 27 Sep 2016 10:14:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com [173.37.86.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6B97A12B2AA; Tue, 27 Sep 2016 10:14:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2713; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1474996471; x=1476206071; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=pEN7Y9POGFslZV18iThRfPIcUxCgX0Pzu00qhFMKY8s=; b=UT4klq57940TiZAEGK26T21hE4uwRRMN1OeDNs/QSNDH7VxHxkf3Sg8x lMeZUdJ5bJDCmf4zNiLbrnHlN49DOpyZPqX0miU9RtlbG2mhWHliiUnWa rNpS46PeDo4dv8EBlKSr+zszcCwpIzQXopRnwlIN6yAqa8HjPyUeBCIxb E=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0CEBABBqOpX/4oNJK1dGgEBAQECAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QgBAQEBgwk2AQEBAQEegVqzMoURggaGHoFiORMBAgEBAQEBAQFeJ4RoeRIBDAF?= =?us-ascii?q?zJwQBDYhSvmIBAQEBAQEEAQEBAQEBAQEBHo8hEQGFegWOb4sHAY9pgW6EZIkah?= =?us-ascii?q?wmJXgEgATOFBoVqgSB/AQEB?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.30,405,1470700800"; d="scan'208,217";a="151448696" Received: from alln-core-5.cisco.com ([173.36.13.138]) by rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 27 Sep 2016 17:14:30 +0000 Received: from XCH-RCD-014.cisco.com (xch-rcd-014.cisco.com [173.37.102.24]) by alln-core-5.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u8RHEUgc025189 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 27 Sep 2016 17:14:30 GMT Received: from xch-aln-013.cisco.com (173.36.7.23) by XCH-RCD-014.cisco.com (173.37.102.24) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Tue, 27 Sep 2016 12:14:29 -0500 Received: from xch-aln-013.cisco.com ([173.36.7.23]) by XCH-ALN-013.cisco.com ([173.36.7.23]) with mapi id 15.00.1210.000; Tue, 27 Sep 2016 12:14:29 -0500 From: "Kamran Raza (skraza)" To: "mpls@ietf.org" , "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: A quick update on LDP/mLDP Yang model (draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-mldp-yang) Thread-Index: AQHSGOKb5eogi3e2+0Si505wUXFXXg== Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 17:14:29 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.4.7.141117 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [10.86.254.46] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_D410212F144122skrazaciscocom_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "Rtg-yang-coord@ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-mldp-yang@tools.ietf.org" Subject: [Rtg-yang-coord] A quick update on LDP/mLDP Yang model (draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-mldp-yang) X-BeenThere: rtg-yang-coord@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "\"List to discuss coordination between the Routing related YANG models\"" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 17:14:33 -0000 --_000_D410212F144122skrazaciscocom_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello MPLS WG and WG chairs, This email is to give a quick update on the current work being done on the= IETF LDP/mLDP Yang draft (draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-mldp-yang-00). * Multi-vendor team is meeting twice a month to progress on the model: * Cisco, Juniper, Huawei, Ciena, Ericsson, Nokia * The current focus of the team is to: * address remaining MPLS-RT comments * divide the model into "base" and "extended" features * general cleanup * We plan to submit a next revision before next IETF. * We also want to get feedback from WG/chairs on whether it makes sense= to divide this large document (which is already > 115 pages) into two sepa= rate documents - one covering LDP Yang and other mLDP yang. * We will still keep mLDP model dependent on LDP. * Please advise. Rgds. - Kamran (on behalf of authors) --_000_D410212F144122skrazaciscocom_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-ID: <3A8E7EDED510D24FA95FB8776EC978C7@emea.cisco.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hello MPLS WG and WG chairs,

This email is to give a quick update on the current work being done on= the IETF LDP/mLDP Yang draft (draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-mldp-yang-00).

Multi-vendor team is meeting twice a month to progress on the model:
- Cisco, Juniper, Huawei, Ciena, Ericsson, Nokia
The current focus of the team is to:
- address remaining MPLS-RT comments
- divide the model into “= ;base” and “extended” features
- general cleanup
We plan to submit a next revision before next IETF.
We also want to get feedback = from WG/chairs on whether it makes sense to divide this large document= (which is already > 115 pages) into two separate documents – one = covering LDP Yang and other mLDP yang.
- We will still keep mLDP model dependent on LDP.
- Please advise.<= /li>

Rgds.

—

Kamran

(on behalf of authors)

--_000_D410212F144122skrazaciscocom_--