IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoptions: draft-lhotka-dnsop-iana-class-type-yang

Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> Fri, 11 October 2019 14:28 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@nohats.ca>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8895C120052; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 07:28:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nohats.ca
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 WAXrEytxBqyt; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 07:28:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.nohats.ca (mx.nohats.ca [193.110.157.68]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 366BD12003F; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 07:28:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46qVg71flbzDZ2; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 16:28:19 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nohats.ca; s=default; t=1570804099; bh=kKM+xCM3f0SfEnz6QxdWOqL2LUF0O16/UhNP4/Q7oV4=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=KBfULKs+kVNzll2WXzLPoXBNqeVgkoskwI8oKDrDe6XXMrSgSRrIsJU8NKn5c/o9/ uPvTBJrkt1yl/3yLgbN64tL5tJK0x8txCC30vugPfNDYXGj1rKanCc4BqmSXB1fDVR qV7/PfRp2p3gjoPhnPhxVBT+9TN/yz8h7pihgJXY=
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mx.nohats.ca
Received: from mx.nohats.ca ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:::1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id N9Z6dREvRJty; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 16:28:17 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from bofh.nohats.ca (bofh.nohats.ca [76.10.157.69]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 16:28:17 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix, from userid 1000) id A8F7E6007C40; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 10:28:16 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7A939B00; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 10:28:16 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 10:28:16 -0400
From: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
To: Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz>
cc: DNSOP WG <dnsop@ietf.org>, iesg@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <87h84fo18w.fsf@nic.cz>
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.21.1910111027040.20432@bofh.nohats.ca>
References: <820fe3a1-9d54-15c1-8194-8a607bdf6a31@NLnetLabs.nl> <87sgqy2azd.fsf@nic.cz> <920E9418-4440-46F6-87B7-68CF8B03C408@gmx.net> <C66220A931BC4753B6818DAF898AE2E8@T1650> <426d8bf2-cf28-11f6-4435-08fcaa37e7f5@NLnetLabs.nl> <alpine.LRH.2.21.1910071329420.19930@bofh.nohats.ca> <0A5478B0-BC32-46AA-A915-ABC026D247CA@gmx.net> <CA+nkc8BjHrCF7PO_0RKETcLWhNDDA2M66antFE=xusHcdsVHhA@mail.gmail.com> <93dba67e7c86fe1679f9ca534740c93e7af1eabf.camel@nic.cz> <alpine.LRH.2.21.1910091628450.11081@bofh.nohats.ca> <874l0hrr9c.fsf@nic.cz> <alpine.LRH.2.21.1910100951010.10011@bofh.nohats.ca> <87h84fo18w.fsf@nic.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/VfltPfm8gm_-wqmaWTeLS7RcpJ0>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoptions: draft-lhotka-dnsop-iana-class-type-yang
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnsop/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 14:28:22 -0000

On Fri, 11 Oct 2019, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:

>> My suggestion was a link the proper IANA registries, which _are_ updated
>> by other RFCs to place things into obsolete/deprecated and receive new
>> entries based on other new RFCs.
>>
>> As you said the implementors need to go to the IANA/YANG module place, a
>> link to that would be more useful than including a current snapshot of
>> the IANA registries.
>
> I agree but, unfortunately, any proper solution might take quite some time. As a temporary solution, would it be possible to continue with the current draft (in DNSOP WG or elsewhere) provided that it will be emphasized that the RFC is intended primarily for IANA, and that implementors should look for the module at the IANA page?

Let's see what the IESG has to say on this, as they have been working on
this issue.

Paul

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email