Dear Ted, David, As a co-author the the draft-sun-softwire-yang-00, I have to admit this draft is pre-mature and needs in-depth discussion before it can go forward. We don’t know how far it will have progressed since this original idea as well as the document structure needs feedback from both the Softwire WG and the netmod WG. We don’t hope this draft to be a potential blocking point of the doc that has got consensus of the WG, as the discussions might be long. Thanks, Qi On Oct 21, 2014, at 1:03 AM, Ted Lemon <ted.lemon@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Oct 20, 2014, at 9:43 AM, Black, David <david.black@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> Whether adding an informative mention of the YANG model rises to the level of >> "required" would be up to the OPS ADs. It may help implementers find the YANG >> model, which could be useful. > > The problem with this is that the informative reference would wind up being to a -00 draft of the yang data model; unless that document makes rapid progress, it's unlikely that the reference will be to a version of the document that anybody would find useful. It might be worth asking the authors of that document where they think it will be in two or three months, since that's about the length of the RFC Editor queue at the moment, IIRC.