Re: [core] Robert Wilton's Discuss on draft-ietf-core-sid-21: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com> Fri, 20 October 2023 16:27 UTC

Return-Path: <andy@yumaworks.com>
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 52491C14CEFD for <core@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Oct 2023 09:27:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.105
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.105 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=yumaworks.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uuaFUs97dzeq for <core@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Oct 2023 09:27:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lj1-x233.google.com (mail-lj1-x233.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::233]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 97B4BC14CE2C for <core@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Oct 2023 09:27:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lj1-x233.google.com with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-2c50cf61f6dso16233291fa.2 for <core@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Oct 2023 09:27:11 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yumaworks.com; s=google; t=1697819230; x=1698424030; darn=ietf.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=guczvG/fZgSrrurj2ZhDW+Fc7cYJJHaafM0BkZa1Uh4=; b=LxgqXzseCCP/WLKV/OzrL2Z1jqPuZGQ3dlIoNkWNqB1+3aY4fLFx7ImqdR4Yoi+2+L c5m8djOLh/sGI4MlubzyBzhpizjprcYLm9EeWRagnK8uoVEPeVqoNi84ihYxaIW/cxF0 hefHEWX/6VBRlMVeu7gXBCtcc47erl/ipacckJ9URXSxRLDtg7CyIaCdpNFH1uwMwy1U SVPkzkTjLWhg5c+QNJHYnC/zfiQeOV8cOtgRKcZxgYTBw761H0uFIz6EViF7VP1p5hoh PkN2C+BZrJli5hINsb3P8Qrp2ecZUHwrQuERNa+thQCBSohQTXauQNS9sa32RIkc1pEe Ut6A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1697819230; x=1698424030; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=guczvG/fZgSrrurj2ZhDW+Fc7cYJJHaafM0BkZa1Uh4=; b=FZwmQja0d4S/SnpD7sP8xNzbvVZY1341RhRMzPs4lbJZcDcJRSr6TJWjIleSfmuhc3 D5SufDBsjjtXmq/XngnP76Yn79V1HLPGyLBmiYmuhMgxz9ZlzTQrBiaA/tfFr0JVm3dd WF1twzM6Sqh3SronUpAED29xxXka9Ae7hL6jkFtKd6qZGvWpsYJBKW65Y8iyrvP9osFu qPvXy5d6wke2+tx1nI9TguCkq/9blsoGG3lBNWvCGAfyWuZQehGCdYZkDhVjH338ml4N C9QI1RG8W2QhmrJmOqqzFgxHx4nFUpXkVlZQW6eh1MBLgRkw7q4BtsWzkNISDPZQEo7G e6HQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxOEfDpJtYMnybiWGlRSn9jAbh3zmaBpVPQ+0PxmUBEZEzjaoyO goouGhJ4+Kf/XhbyQI6OMeDpaX8KqEllNyM+u9fO0Q==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IG1qh0lpjHvndvU6jjF7FrfhIq0cmTGf4tejqkNFVY0PGBpsGVY/1fjfxrWIA8BVSCJID7q6we9u91AKWtFwU0=
X-Received: by 2002:ac2:4573:0:b0:507:b8c5:6542 with SMTP id k19-20020ac24573000000b00507b8c56542mr1810303lfm.65.1697819229460; Fri, 20 Oct 2023 09:27:09 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <169771413973.18245.13961801523377715904@ietfa.amsl.com> <17278.1697817469@localhost>
In-Reply-To: <17278.1697817469@localhost>
From: Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2023 09:26:58 -0700
Message-ID: <CABCOCHSt=dM+7BZWtmcE3Kt+r48Cve1M7T38COvsBqU14sG8Qg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
Cc: Robert Wilton <rwilton@cisco.com>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-core-sid@ietf.org, core-chairs@ietf.org, core@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000010b574060828589a"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/core/lcODobEv9puMqrKSQhGm-O2Xm3s>
Subject: Re: [core] Robert Wilton's Discuss on draft-ietf-core-sid-21: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: core@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Fri, 20 Oct 2023 16:27:16 -0000

On Fri, Oct 20, 2023 at 8:58 AM Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
wrote:

>
> Thank you for persisting through this Rob!
>
> Robert Wilton via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> wrote:
>     > related aspects for creating/managing SID files in drafts that I want
>     > to ensure
>     > that the IESG is at very least aware of and happy with.
>
>     > (1) p 23, sec 6.4.3.  Publication of the ".sid" file
>
>     > For a YANG module approved for publication as an RFC, a ".sid" file
>     > SHOULD be included in the Internet-Draft as a source code block.
>
>     > I'm wondering if this is really the best approach.  I.e., I think to
>     > guarantee
>     > that the SID file is correct at the point of pulication (e.g., if
> names
>     > of YANG
>
> For the first year or two, with a new YANG module I strongly think that the
> authors need to review the resulting sid file (the allocations) to be sure
> that they are correct.
>
> Yes, of course, IANA or RPC SHOULD double check.
> It is here that we might run into bugs in pyang that the RPC will need
> support on, and this is why I keep poking the Tools team about pyang
> maintenance.
>
> I also want to push back on the idea that SIDs are just for constrained
> environments: we have heard from Andy that every byte counts in bigger
> networks, and that comparing uin63s is gonna be way faster than XML string
> compares.
>
>
Agreed.
The use-case for YANG Push has always been an unconstrained device in a
constrained network.

There is no way that SID files from RFCs can just be generated by IANA and
published.
An Expert Review Team should be responsible for that. The tools and
procedures are too new.
Multiple independent verification tools are still needed.

Generating and maintaining a SID file database for a large YANG module set
is complicated.
That is, a robust, complete, and 100% correct SID file database.
A flawed and incomplete database is much easier to create. ;-)

For YANG Push using CBOR, any YANG module could need a SID file.
IMO the CORE WG is not responsible for figuring out this SID database.
It needs more work on tools and procedures, probably in the NETMOD WG.



--
> Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
>            Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
>
>
>
Andy


>
>
> _______________________________________________
> core mailing list
> core@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/core
>