Re: [core] Zaheduzzaman Sarker's Discuss on draft-ietf-core-sid-16: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Sun, 14 November 2021 21:19 UTC
Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
X-Original-To: core@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: core@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AAAC3A0811; Sun, 14 Nov 2021 13:19:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 iD2AzMRCBkvD; Sun, 14 Nov 2021 13:19:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gabriel-smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B706B3A0817; Sun, 14 Nov 2021 13:19:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.217.118] (p5089a436.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [80.137.164.54]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4HslZW2xGNz2xrl; Sun, 14 Nov 2021 22:19:31 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.7\))
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <0133A9EE-45A5-4240-85FC-60D30280F4B0@tzi.org>
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2021 22:19:31 +0100
Cc: draft-ietf-core-sid@ietf.org, core-chairs@ietf.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, core@ietf.org
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 658617570.970914-18301371293e26de891c1e9303dd06e0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <F4DDB5C4-E3B6-455E-955F-553A01051FA4@tzi.org>
References: <162634134491.20957.9891384677904460366@ietfa.amsl.com> <0133A9EE-45A5-4240-85FC-60D30280F4B0@tzi.org>
To: Zaheduzzaman Sarker <Zaheduzzaman.Sarker@ericsson.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.7)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/core/9p-xtVHcZtMhpgPmJWmmXJWKHPI>
Subject: Re: [core] Zaheduzzaman Sarker's Discuss on draft-ietf-core-sid-16: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: core@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Constrained RESTful Environments \(CoRE\) Working Group list" <core.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/core>, <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/core/>
List-Post: <mailto:core@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/core>, <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2021 21:19:40 -0000
Hi Zahed, just checking whether you got the below (I’m sometimes having problems reaching ericsson.com mail addresses). Grüße, Carsten > On 2021-10-29, at 20:45, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote: > > [Duplicate copy because of mail weirdness:] > > Hi Zahed, > > it took us a while to process the DISCUSS positions and COMMENTS on core-sid. > We didn’t quite finish before the I-D deadline, but did submit a -17. > Link to diff: > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-core-sid-17.txt > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> DISCUSS: >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >> This should be very easy to resolve and I want to make sure that we understand >> the situation here better - >> >> *Section 3 : says - >> >> "The creation of this new version of the ".sid" file >> SHOULD be performed using an automated tool" >> >> If this is supposed to be the automation process written in appendix B then >> putting a reference here makes sense. If not, then as this is very important >> tool, more information need to be added here in this specification (like, >> where to find it, who create and maintains it, any reference to such an >> existing tools). Also I am missing what consequences one need to consider if >> the process is not automated. If this is same as written in the introduction - >> >> "Assignment of SIDs to YANG items can be automated. For more details >> how this can be achieved, please consult Appendix B." >> >> Then we have two kind of instructions for the same thing - "can be" and a >> normative "SHOULD". Hence it need to be clarified which one should prevail. > > Indeed. We have converged on SHOULD. -17 says: > > (Intro:) > Assignment of SIDs to YANG items SHOULD be automated. For more > details how this can be achieved, and when manual interventions may > be appropriate, see Appendix B. > […] > At the time of writing, a tool for automated SID file generation is > available as part of the open-source project PYANG [PYANG]. > > (Informative References:) > [PYANG] Bjorklund, M., "An extensible YANG validator and converter > in python", <https://github.com/mbj4668/pyang>. > > (Appendix B:) > Assignment of SIDs to YANG items SHOULD be automated. The > recommended process to assign SIDs is as follows: […] > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> COMMENT: >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Thanks for the efforts in this document. >> >> * I support Robert Wilton's Discuss and Benjamin Kaduk's discuss no.2 > > We will address these in separate emails. > >> One more clarification comment - >> >> * Section 7.5.2: says - >> >> " The >> maximum SID range size is 1000. A larger size may be requested by >> the authors if this recommendation is considered insufficient. It is >> important to note that an additional SID range can be allocated to an >> existing YANG module if the initial range is exhausted." >> >> I have hard time understanding the mentioning of the maximum SID range here. >> does this mean this document sets the maximum range to 1000 but others can >> have more? please clarify. > > This text was indeed a bit clumsy. > It now says: > > The > SID range size SHOULD NOT exceed 1000; a larger size may be requested > by the authors if this recommendation is considered insufficient. It > is important to note that an additional SID range can be allocated to > an existing YANG module if the initial range is exhausted; this then > just leads to slightly less efficient representation. > > Grüße, Carsten > > _______________________________________________ > core mailing list > core@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/core
- [core] Zaheduzzaman Sarker's Discuss on draft-iet… Zaheduzzaman Sarker via Datatracker
- Re: [core] Zaheduzzaman Sarker's Discuss on draft… Michael Richardson
- Re: [core] Zaheduzzaman Sarker's Discuss on draft… Zaheduzzaman Sarker
- Re: [core] Zaheduzzaman Sarker's Discuss on draft… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [core] Zaheduzzaman Sarker's Discuss on draft… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [core] Zaheduzzaman Sarker's Discuss on draft… Zaheduzzaman Sarker