search

ietf-ccamp-wg / ietf-ccamp-layer0-types-ext-RFC9093-bis

CCAMP WG repository for ietf-layer0-types-ext
3 stars 3 forks source link

YANG Doctor LC comments #70

Closed italobusi closed 1 year ago

italobusi commented 1 year ago

YANG module updates to fix YD last call comments: fix https://github.com/ietf-ccamp-wg/ietf-ccamp-layer0-types-ext-RFC9093-bis/issues/68

Updated FEC identities: fix #16

Removed DC-DP-QAM8 and DC-DP-QAM16 identities: fix #7

Changed names of power-in-db data types into ratio-in-db: fix #74

Added support for multiple line codings for the same ITU-T application code or for the same organizational mode: fix #62

Added the base identity for operational-mode definitions: fix #9

Clarified how available nominal central frequencies in flexi-grid are advertised: fix #61

Updated reference to RFC8776-bis: fix #71

Co-authored-by: sergio belotti sergio.belotti@nokia.com

sergiobelotti commented 1 year ago

See the reply from YANG doctor to our proposed modifications: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/SgAhvhAvK6JK0M2M2qelbr5zaDE/

Thanks, Segio. I’ve looked at your GH diffs, and I think you addressed my comments. Yes, you fixed the quoting inconsistencies.

Your approach to “isolating” the relative paths is interesting, and should make the grouping safer to re-use. That said, I don’t see how you’re signaling such augmentation would be needed by external consumers.

Joe

sergiobelotti commented 1 year ago

See the reply from YANG doctor to our proposed modifications: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/SgAhvhAvK6JK0M2M2qelbr5zaDE/

Thanks, Segio. I’ve looked at your GH diffs, and I think you addressed my comments. Yes, you fixed the quoting inconsistencies.

Your approach to “isolating” the relative paths is interesting, and should make the grouping safer to re-use. That said, I don’t see how you’re signaling such augmentation would be needed by external consumers.

Joe Weekly call June 13th

We need to change the name of the container supported-modes inside the explicit-mode into compatible-modes, and move it back into the transceiver-mode grouping as an empty container and describe into the transceiver-mode description that the compatible-mode container shall be augmented with the proper leafrefs when used and reference the transceiver-capabilities grouping.

italobusi commented 1 year ago

Still some dB vs. dBm issue.

Addressed in https://github.com/ietf-ccamp-wg/ietf-ccamp-layer0-types-ext-RFC9093-bis/pull/70/commits/0038f5e771db23c9e2109f149b30d3226340db67

Co-authored-by: sergio belotti sergio.belotti@nokia.com