[core] Re: draft-ietf-core-yang-sid-pen-03 ietf last call Opsdir review
Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Mon, 08 December 2025 19:52 UTC
Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
X-Original-To: core@mail2.ietf.org
Delivered-To: core@mail2.ietf.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 594179793694; Mon, 8 Dec 2025 11:52:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ietf.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: mail2.ietf.org (amavisd-new); dkim=neutral reason="invalid (public key: not available)" header.d=tzi.org
Received: from mail2.ietf.org ([166.84.6.31]) by localhost (mail2.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2I8E_ncyEEd9; Mon, 8 Dec 2025 11:52:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de (smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.21]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F17A597935BC; Mon, 8 Dec 2025 11:51:38 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=tzi.org; s=2019; t=1765223498; bh=59000crltvTyTQ1nhWlHEkL/WOm2bAYeh3RFtXfWcPE=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=K40F/j/rFWCppVoS7IKgJimKmd3cY+yBBJ2mq+qf26vNgOmPjycYy0Y7HVDZKBucf cESPwGKGtP69wTtf8HqEiGjz/FpUPkfI89B7wVX0SRkjdnhkawL0dqdvrMl2eWltcY Bx6VFwBRG6nxPuxOQoo9ibaJS+OlSmYhtZbZNC+SpQABQwiYAmJoHca7LOgcs0lVVS exoEj4ao+bZxZphS9G4wo3YuMPKpBoeUhhdQ0Q7VKODPMe4tFinNKvy1Rx+14GgjJx 3yPtkpH7T7BZoF79cPID1F/5TIz7t4rSYnTQtET09KJrMctlvR4i0AAKmtxMz5U/7P P6Y2YJk79meGw==
Received: from smtpclient.apple (p548dcea3.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.206.163]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4dQCKj5thWzDCbK; Mon, 8 Dec 2025 20:51:37 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3826.700.81\))
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <176491001194.307816.16582572081316483202@dt-datatracker-5bd94c585b-wk4l4>
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2025 20:51:27 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <25A0C5A1-A947-4182-879D-DF00DF336A23@tzi.org>
References: <176491001194.307816.16582572081316483202@dt-datatracker-5bd94c585b-wk4l4>
To: Nabeel Cocker <ncocker@redhat.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3826.700.81)
X-FromAuthMilter: ok
Message-ID-Hash: 3RRLSMKJQFQOEYJDY47NJ4HX4ZBGKKCY
X-Message-ID-Hash: 3RRLSMKJQFQOEYJDY47NJ4HX4ZBGKKCY
X-MailFrom: cabo@tzi.org
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-core.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: ops-dir@ietf.org, core@ietf.org, draft-ietf-core-yang-sid-pen.all@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [core] Re: draft-ietf-core-yang-sid-pen-03 ietf last call Opsdir review
List-Id: "Constrained RESTful Environments (CoRE) Working Group list" <core.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/core/g1TypfHoCJPJNbplN1Vls16lY0o>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/core>
List-Help: <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:core-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:core@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:core-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:core-leave@ietf.org>
Hi Nabeel, Thank you for your attentive review. > On Dec 5, 2025, at 05:46, Nabeel Cocker via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> wrote: > > I did have a question on section 3 Discussion and in particular the third major > bullet and the suggestions for PEN holders to provide an infrastructure to > discover the YANG module behind a SID either by using a git forge or a YANG > library or both. The question I have is whether there is a preference between > these two? Just a though if there is a preferred approach based on some > experience it would be good to include that. At this point, I don’t think we have the operational experience that would allow us to make a decision and express a preference. So that’s why we offer multiple approaches in a discussion section. I’m sure we will figure this out after some deployment. The important point for us was that we should ask for discoverability, even if that isn’t always fully automatic. Grüße, Carsten
- [core] draft-ietf-core-yang-sid-pen-03 ietf last … Nabeel Cocker via Datatracker
- [core] Re: draft-ietf-core-yang-sid-pen-03 ietf l… Carsten Bormann