Re: [babel] Last Call: <draft-ietf-babel-yang-model-09.txt> (YANG Data Model for Babel) to Proposed Standard
Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com> Mon, 17 May 2021 04:27 UTC
Return-Path: <mjethanandani@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 015173A260B; Sun, 16 May 2021 21:27:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vTvBGyK_DKpM; Sun, 16 May 2021 21:27:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pf1-x431.google.com (mail-pf1-x431.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::431]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 120BB3A260E; Sun, 16 May 2021 21:27:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pf1-x431.google.com with SMTP id g18so2426975pfr.2; Sun, 16 May 2021 21:27:42 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=ryPm4c/8D3JyjE9wIREXA8MySPKqDZ/5GgABio+TlyQ=; b=GVoY6Nfid0bUZRiO0HTphxK5XCibu9ZLKnnw34e29vdbKL9VJhEZgSYhvyMjPcVOe7 BuXxmFnEiohTY3eqnHVonZJj/P5P1ZwxsF63f2SMQaLCwPEEfJPhoIooxXaFmNMsqcBx j1iiEXDtNpOXNa4EoiUPOP14c8CPEb68Bds/XIeRgAtTHct1dJMlMt/d8yn/LP75fKVm +4a4UaU3LjLC7WQsO/i2VeO8DUSPHotptl01L6kwYOdcMwre5XqQVlKwiiV1ItVvOHZe Zwyiw4wERJ+JbHXW+ioE9TlAnMAYWv1UGmdU5SUpXdktsOcRWQvu+04W30SP1Fb6elwH dhcg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=ryPm4c/8D3JyjE9wIREXA8MySPKqDZ/5GgABio+TlyQ=; b=WMdVTgsGEX6l68/mbYNfJ1HS5kaAP5pJFmfhZqtFIk3FAk2WzMDOokf983HRAB56vF tTtIkeRUQQgu4OuazgWetz5LCqPGSTyVaeP3037wbDive5NnXj3fJg8PHtcW5oLfTA4w tyxNWkPZxNFqogI4qesbE64ACKIpQyPtjXeBGyrO3ptSkZ1rj2gKPYub5Y3FS0L0BsXv +4wHdvAIeVtYU6jiHhl5cQNEv90auEFZDiGggiKlYHzeloVxDckvj3+0CRMu6KI1z8XJ xhHwGScxsPSKBWCdWwIgdk74NQ+MuPhmKq+b7xFKqRvLdF1nNzpYthj7q2ZMhuVrxy8e Hl4Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532JRRKSobH5kYuXNO6xJinHjugusZuyqiTTg5b6wqg1AjZ2Dlrc 5DOCE39G0SdvxYeROxVu330=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxL7LJrv3fMls4/u64db8IVNnDeMB5af++u7PseuTvKQg7FPl4eohYVoXt16Npbz8dIrZ2NTQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:1a42:b029:2c5:3039:b62f with SMTP id h2-20020a056a001a42b02902c53039b62fmr1750203pfv.27.1621225661862; Sun, 16 May 2021 21:27:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2601:647:5600:5020:50a:2eca:7550:efd0? ([2601:647:5600:5020:50a:2eca:7550:efd0]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g8sm8775840pfo.85.2021.05.16.21.27.40 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 16 May 2021 21:27:41 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <411086E6-9BE0-4523-AD75-49C2E7F2D3D0@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_53F9345A-E3E6-4474-9218-89BA3DC24981"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\))
Date: Sun, 16 May 2021 21:27:40 -0700
In-Reply-To: <609FAB33.4000201@btconnect.com>
Cc: last-call@ietf.org, babel-chairs <babel-chairs@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-babel-yang-model@ietf.org, babel@ietf.org
To: tom petch <daedulus@btconnect.com>
References: <161788580040.14525.8607775335520195175@ietfa.amsl.com> <607406F2.70500@btconnect.com> <BAD13FB1-2787-4DFF-ACD5-BB259FA0D43C@gmail.com> <609E4ED3.5010101@btconnect.com> <A42366E1-6C05-4E17-A371-66D6904B5BBF@gmail.com> <609EA6A3.1040303@btconnect.com> <185C6A7C-D5D8-4FAB-BCBB-62525CBCBDDC@gmail.com> <609FAB33.4000201@btconnect.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/babel/IXpkyeeSj_ViIHepjmVlVWs5uo4>
Subject: Re: [babel] Last Call: <draft-ietf-babel-yang-model-09.txt> (YANG Data Model for Babel) to Proposed Standard
X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." <babel.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/babel>, <mailto:babel-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/babel/>
List-Post: <mailto:babel@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:babel-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel>, <mailto:babel-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 May 2021 04:27:48 -0000
Hi Tom, > On May 15, 2021, at 4:06 AM, tom petch <daedulus@btconnect.com> wrote: > > On 14/05/2021 17:59, Mahesh Jethanandani wrote: >> Hi Tom, >> >> Are you suggesting that there should be no references to RFC numbers in the description statement? Note, the reference statement that follows the description statement has the complete reference to the RFC which is being cited in the description statement. > > I am saying that [RFC ZZZZ] and such like are usually xML and not plain text and that a YANG module is required to be plain text as when it is extracted from the RFC and floats off on is own independent of the rest of the RFC. The 'canonical form' of a YANG module is plain text! Where in RFC 7950 or RFC 8407 does it say that? > > Tom Petch > >> Cheers. >> >>> On May 14, 2021, at 9:34 AM, tom petch <daedulus@btconnect.com> wrote: >>> >>> On 14/05/2021 17:17, Mahesh Jethanandani wrote: >>>> Hi Tom, >>>> >>>> Can you point to something specific? Thanks. >>> >>> >>> action reset >>> ...[RFC ZZZZ] >>> ... >>> leaf value >>> [RFC2104]...[RFC4868]... [RFC8697]... [RFC7693] >>> ... >>> leaf value >>> [RFC7468] >>> >>> Tom Petch >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>>> On May 14, 2021, at 3:20 AM, tom petch <daedulus@btconnect.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On 12/05/2021 21:46, Mahesh Jethanandani wrote: >>>>>> This has been addressed in -10 version of the draft. Cheers. >>>>> >>>>> Indeed it has. >>>>> >>>>> I note that some YANG clauses have [references] in them which are >>>>> likely not plain text; doubtless that will be fixed at some point >>>>> in the process. >>>>> >>>>> Tom Petch >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Apr 12, 2021, at 1:38 AM, tom petch >>>>>>> <daedulus@btconnect.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This I-D introduces a new and unnecessary YANG prefix in >>>>>>> defiance of BCP216 s.4.2. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It imports ietf-yang-types, perhaps the most widely imported >>>>>>> module in the world, and RFC6991, where that module is >>>>>>> specified, defines the proper prefix as 'yang'. This I-D >>>>>>> invents a different one. Technically, YANG can cope with this >>>>>>> but that does not make it a sensible thing to do. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Tom Petch >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 08/04/2021 13:43, The IESG wrote: > >>>> >>>> Mahesh Jethanandani mjethanandani@gmail.com >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> Mahesh Jethanandani >> mjethanandani@gmail.com >> >> >> >> >> >> Mahesh Jethanandani mjethanandani@gmail.com
- [babel] Last Call: <draft-ietf-babel-yang-model-0… The IESG
- Re: [babel] Last Call: <draft-ietf-babel-yang-mod… tom petch
- Re: [babel] Last Call: <draft-ietf-babel-yang-mod… Mahesh Jethanandani
- Re: [babel] Last Call: <draft-ietf-babel-yang-mod… tom petch
- Re: [babel] Last Call: <draft-ietf-babel-yang-mod… Mahesh Jethanandani
- Re: [babel] Last Call: <draft-ietf-babel-yang-mod… tom petch
- Re: [babel] Last Call: <draft-ietf-babel-yang-mod… Mahesh Jethanandani
- Re: [babel] Last Call: <draft-ietf-babel-yang-mod… tom petch
- Re: [babel] Last Call: <draft-ietf-babel-yang-mod… Mahesh Jethanandani
- Re: [babel] Last Call: <draft-ietf-babel-yang-mod… tom petch