Summary

  • On 9 October, the IESG approved charter 21 for the active Network Configuration Working Group.
  • The group history added two milestones due 31 December 2026: submit drafts enhancing YANG-Push and drafts regarding List Pagination to the IESG for publication as Proposed Standards.
  • Earlier review milestones for the same subjects were added in June and deleted in July. The October entries are new targets from the approved charter.
  • A submission milestone is not evidence that a draft has been submitted, approved, published as an RFC, implemented or deployed.

A charter approval can be easy to report as a change of wording. The more useful change is in the record of what comes next. After the IESG approved NETCONF charter 21 on 9 October, the Network Configuration Working Group history gained two concrete year-end targets: one for drafts enhancing YANG-Push and another for drafts regarding List Pagination.

Both entries use the same wording about the next institutional step: submit to the IESG for publication as a Proposed Standard. Both are due on 31 December 2026. The public history names the subjects and dates, but it does not identify particular draft numbers. That leaves a clear question for later updates: which documents, if any, are being carried toward each target?

The sequence matters. On 12 June, the history added a YANG-Push milestone “for review” with a November due date and a List Pagination milestone “for review” due in July. Both were deleted on 18 July. The October entries are not a record that those earlier review targets were met. They are new milestones, explicitly added from the approved charter, with a different endpoint: submission to the IESG.

The approved charter describes the group’s wider responsibility for NETCONF and RESTCONF, YANG-based management, transports and encodings, and supporting data models and mechanisms. The two dates focus a small part of that remit. They make it easier to ask whether the working group is advancing those subjects, while leaving the technical text and the IESG’s later publication decision open.

A milestone is a schedule record. It does not certify that a draft is ready, that working-group review has concluded, or that the IESG will approve publication. “Proposed Standard” names the intended standards-track outcome; the milestone itself is only a target to submit material for that process. Nor do these entries establish interoperability, implementation or operational use.

For readers tracking protocol governance, the news is therefore specific but bounded: charter 21 is approved, and two work items now share a 31 December submission target. The next evidence will be the documents and decisions that appear in the public record, not the date alone.

Sources