Subject: [netmod] Updated version of NMDA Datastores draft with WG LC comments addressed.

From: Robert Wilton <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2017 10:11:54 +0100

Hi,

I've just posted an updated version of the NMDA datastores draft 
(draft-ietf-netmod-revised-datastores-05.txt).  The authors believe that 
this should address all of the issues raised during the WG LC.  The 
issues themselves have been tracked at 
https://github.com/netmod-wg/datastore-dt/issues

Note, there has been a recent (post WG LC) issue raised by Andy 
concerning the handling of Action statements.  A further update to the 
draft may be required depending on the conclusion of that discussion.

Please may I thank you for reviewing the draft and providing comments.  
Please may I also ask that if you raised an issue that you check the 
latest draft/diff to ensure that all of your comments have been 
addressed satisfactorily.

In addition, I would like to summarize what I perceive are the main 
changes made to the draft since WG LC version (-04) so that those 
particular areas can be reviewed as appropriate:

1. There is a new "objectives" section added after the short 
introduction to address Tom's request of a better overview.

2. We have introduced the notion of a "configuration transformation" to 
describe the possible changes between running and intended, hence 
allowing inactive config and templating to be used only as examples and 
not in any normative text.

3. The conventional datastores sections have been moved to a more 
intuitive order, which is a minor change, but causes a slightly larger 
diff when diffing the -04 and -05 versions.

4. The description of <running> and <intended> datastores have both been 
updated, hopefully better explaining the relationship between these 
datastores and <operational>.

Finally, I'll leave it to the WG Chairs to specify what the appropriate 
next steps are in the WG LC process.

Many thanks,
Rob

---

From: Lou Berger <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2017 09:18:28 -0400

Rob/Authors/All,

Thank you for putting in the effort to update the draft based on LC
comments received.  Please let the WG know when you think all open
issues are addressed and we will do a 1 or 2 week 2nd LC depending on
timing relative to IETF100

WG,

Please don't wait for the 2nd LC -- review this document and confirm
that your previous comments have been addressed, and let the WG know if
you have comments on the other changes.

Thank you,
Lou

Co-Chair/Shepherd