Re: [babel] Alvaro Retana's No Objection on draft-ietf-babel-yang-model-10: (with COMMENT)

Alvaro Retana <> Tue, 18 May 2021 18:01 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00E383A1AF9; Tue, 18 May 2021 11:01:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.096
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.096 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3yXROptls63n; Tue, 18 May 2021 11:01:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::634]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3321C3A1AF4; Tue, 18 May 2021 11:01:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id z12so14530512ejw.0; Tue, 18 May 2021 11:01:50 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=mudLZPe2wONdRsg9yM5j3L7Tm5sz05L/uB3O+GoPRxs=; b=Nc6rRjE276S0PENNJo88DzkUVgk5kx4TiZulB26B1bCtcdMVqd2O3tJGmfnKVC9dbY Ahttex0t2c5m1BfCQT4rnUxrt5wHdpCPiQFX6L/21rJWwuqQxna6qlGgtkP0Yp52lti5 w8nAVRUC6D1uEsheDTCRbD09+EI8g0Lo6jelBYRo4V3WQIuwonGzKfSrmsDTLrBtpRaV w73DrT7w7O7vNqpZCaNWrtwo7qi5duOPNgT14mSEECrrqjj8exzvkh4Ki/3aRygTvlGC agqDrp+4kgFG0/R7koEdoENPCkGOJ/3X3dTfAnHLlou2B/PgqoqV3qbdrBPsPHFLzr4I 0LFQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=mudLZPe2wONdRsg9yM5j3L7Tm5sz05L/uB3O+GoPRxs=; b=me+OvFaJ56y68cJc7SHDyXHMMhsapjUF96xRNFUW2QkhK3VIiUfzTtQHDBndAXyNWO awI5THm5ARP+o50R2KGUAd/FRkk6l/LxxfsAmDMG9sWWpautiQK1KEYGzIql5sfUhU0r szv0PfoVh1tLCagObNFB5DFRPAUlgrWHw8BRwkTO3asIiYNUoEYUbqJNRmevbPxEZVVc CoLwoK+tGjmP0ubAHkkclW19q4HQN7sZ8B1Zj2TZ3Y+KAvTO1Yml0+Vrpq58rUci/SV8 a85wjlW+/4QdpgjHHcMiark+ICI5ABETThhgiaKspS/FhT6LD94zr36D5og/eFOzrZOn KSng==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533O4SuyrXyt+AfFYMZQezTw71VvJqQjF11fP+txdCL4EFr4mUme aDR4RMBCucjd1eDEbLxKNLg4HPM1RY6mZxrQzxE=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwqPePL2E0Zk667oR114G7I/koHLMMxduW2GMxqyCCFAGFAPZPUVKSirxPf/xzzeOCyYjgzWtSZMKXdyZnkJyA=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:ad9a:: with SMTP id la26mr7404867ejb.122.1621360906913; Tue, 18 May 2021 11:01:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 1058052472880 named unknown by with HTTPREST; Tue, 18 May 2021 11:01:46 -0700
From: Alvaro Retana <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Tue, 18 May 2021 11:01:46 -0700
Message-ID: <>
To: Mahesh Jethanandani <>
Cc: Babel at IETF <>, Donald Eastlake <>, The IESG <>, babel-chairs <>,
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [babel] Alvaro Retana's No Objection on draft-ietf-babel-yang-model-10: (with COMMENT)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 May 2021 18:01:55 -0000

On May 17, 2021 at 9:02:01 PM, Mahesh Jethanandani wrote:



> > §1: "It is based on the Babel Information Model
> > [I-D.ietf-babel-information-model]." The reference should be Normative.
> This gets into a whole lot of discussion around whether the information model
> is informational or not, something that has already happened in the WG and
> when that document came up in front of IESG (I think). I believe the decision
> was to keep the information model as informative.

The status of the document has nothing to do with the need (or not) to
reference it in a normative way.  In general, "normative references
specify documents that must be read to understand or implement the
technology" [1].  In this case, the YANG model is based on the
Information model: the reference should be Normative regardless of the
status of the documents.

> I have therefore kept the reference as Informative. If I try to move it into
> the Normative part of the reference section, I get a downref error.

Having a Downref is not a showstopper -- it simply needs to be called
out on the IETF LC.  There are many documents that have been used as
Downrefs [2].