IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [core] progressing ietf-core-yang-cbor and ietf-core-sid

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Sun, 12 January 2020 00:30 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
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 E5DD012004E for <core@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 11 Jan 2020 16:30:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, PDS_TONAME_EQ_TOLOCAL_HDRS_LCASE=1.999, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, 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 Dgrvd7k58CEX for <core@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 11 Jan 2020 16:30:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C419312004D for <core@ietf.org>; Sat, 11 Jan 2020 16:30:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7F503897D; Sat, 11 Jan 2020 19:29:49 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 543AA431; Sat, 11 Jan 2020 19:30:13 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: core <core@ietf.org>, Ivaylo Petrov <ivaylo@ackl.io>
In-Reply-To: <CAJFkdRztFUxdGcdvtTgB=9c-e_BwDAgLTmVPJ+OB8-dgs1sGog@mail.gmail.com>
References: <29380.1565102380@localhost> <BL0PR06MB50428065032ECC2AB3345F619AD70@BL0PR06MB5042.namprd06.prod.outlook.com> <7505.1565633977@localhost> <BL0PR06MB50424C618A704460E4A8F8D99AA90@BL0PR06MB5042.namprd06.prod.outlook.com> <18990.1577231446@localhost> <CAJFkdRyWOfCb4U09rEJ-ZMR3GUuk-rmQ+f3Fs164Mxs8qkeVuw@mail.gmail.com> <22612.1578626081@localhost> <CAJFkdRztFUxdGcdvtTgB=9c-e_BwDAgLTmVPJ+OB8-dgs1sGog@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 24.5.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2020 19:30:13 -0500
Message-ID: <15754.1578789013@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/core/oIbLXDl-AH1fozAFp6u55YGtt88>
Subject: Re: [core] progressing ietf-core-yang-cbor and ietf-core-sid
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, 12 Jan 2020 00:30:17 -0000

Ivaylo Petrov <ivaylo@ackl.io> wrote:
    >> I think that the major issue is that I am still not convinced that
    >> IANA is prepared to operate pyang itself.  Conversations at IETF105
    >> and IETF106 did not convince me that they (IANA) completely understood
    >> what they are being asked to do.  For instance, I'm not convinced that
    >> there is a support process for IANA to get bugs fixed in the sid.py
    >> module.
    >>
    >> (I would be pleased to be convinced otherwise)

    > I remember that during the discussion with IANA we considered that the
    > authors and the expert will be responsible for the running of the pyang
    > tool and IANA will only take the .sid file and store it. The .sid files
    > will be provided to IANA when there is a request to register the .sid
    > file - however that is done. Do you see an error in our reasoning other
    > that the fact that we might be burdening the authors too much?  Does
    > this seem acceptable to you?

okay, so the expert reviewer needs to be able to run pyang --generate-sid-file, etc.
I don't know if IANA has a process to accept files online, but I guess
attachments to tickets will work.

    >> (3) a document could ask for an early SID allocation, referencing a
    >> YANG module which is in another WG, or worse, not yet adopted, and
    >> therefore not subject to Early Adoption rules!  This may be a problem
    >> we do not to fix (Just get the document adopted), but I think that we
    >> should be clear about this.
    >>
    >>
    >> My recommendation is that all YANG modules, upon being *ADOPTED* by a
    >> WG, have a SID allocation done.  Yes, the document will get revised,
    >> but the SID system is designed to deal with this.

    > Yes, that issue does not seem obvious. Currently I don't see a blocking
    > issue with allocating SIDs for all YANG modules once a draft is
    > adopted, so maybe this is truly our best way to avoid problems.

okay, if we are in agreement, then I think that we need text in the SID
document's IANA Considerations that says this.

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email