On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 12:42:03PM +0000, tom p. wrote: > In the interests of clarity > > - datastores are not mentioned. These loom large in YANG and NETCONF > and, I think, have been misunderstood by those wishing to extend YANG in > various, new directions. Therefore I think that the I-D should say > something, even if it is that the concept of datastore is alien to the > envisaged uses of JSON (I could envisage a use where datastores do > apply, but it is probably an unrealistic use:-) > I do not see why an encoding document should talk about datastores. Is there anything unclear how YANG defined data is encoded in JSON? If not, then this document does its job. > -YANG 1.0 ditto. I realise that this I-D normatively references YANG > 1.1 but there is a lot of YANG 1.0 about. My sense is that this I-D > cannot work with YANG 1.0, in which case, I think that that needs > stating. The JSON encoding works just fine with YANG 1.0. Perhaps this can be stated explicitly with an informative reference to RFC 6020 if that helps to avoid confusion. /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103 <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>