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

Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz> Fri, 11 October 2019 14:25 UTC

Return-Path: <lhotka@nic.cz>
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 A5D8E120073; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 07:25:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, 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=nic.cz
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 f-knO0CApxC2; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 07:25:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.nic.cz (mail.nic.cz [IPv6:2001:1488:800:400::400]) (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 708AF12003F; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 07:25:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from birdie (unknown [IPv6:2001:1488:fffe:6:a88f:7eff:fed2:45f8]) by mail.nic.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 35FAB140E90; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 16:25:41 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=nic.cz; s=default; t=1570803941; bh=6tZvDfLUlUU4OCgbweOL/YH7pVTv5DLLTYvEq4NQXMc=; h=From:To:Date; b=o3tKjULr83xKloKIO6sTX4fTA7Kr4XTYAuLTuESHFW4iPVw7lVPGv0aAqHpf0Ye0z LS8GSjKjELx8o1B4K8hJoJpDR6M7AjXHd8VBHic7/AqqtEB5+SYaSZd49u1YHxO0sT tm60m6v5wItToCBKbo+0eWuSeIRn/7bhql0IWnSg=
Message-ID: <3c968bfe4d33f5e072bdcedff7ed701e335cd217.camel@nic.cz>
From: Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz>
To: Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca>, Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
Cc: DNSOP WG <dnsop@ietf.org>, iesg@ietf.org
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 16:25:41 +0200
In-Reply-To: <1FE6DB94-C839-4087-9838-0F7A2EF42B2A@hopcount.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> <1FE6DB94-C839-4087-9838-0F7A2EF42B2A@hopcount.ca>
Organization: CZ.NIC
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.34.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.100.3 at mail.nic.cz
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/hkCwEy0uxAB1csE6xQMqcZ_YIBQ>
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 14:25:47 -0000

On Fri, 2019-10-11 at 10:03 -0400, Joe Abley wrote:
> On 10 Oct 2019, at 09:55, Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>; wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 10 Oct 2019, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> > 
> > > They should not actually be reading the RFC but get the latest revision of
> > > the module from this page:
> > > 
> > > https://www.iana.org/assignments/yang-parameters/yang-parameters.xhtml
> > 
> > You are asking for text to go into an RFC, which you then say they
> > (implementors) should not read. Clearly then the text should not go
> > into the RFC.
> 
> I'm not sure I fully understand the concern, here.
> 
> When a document instructs the IANA to create a registry, those instructions
> contain the initial rows that should seed the registry along with directions
> about how the registry is to be maintained following creation. Is this
> document fundamentally different from that?

IMO, it isn't. The purpose is also stated in the text, perhaps more explanations
can be added here and there.

> 
> Has anybody actually asked PTI what they think the best way of doing this
> would be?

I haven't, based on the precedent of RFC 7224 I took for granted that IANA is
happy with the current workflow.

Lada 

> 
> 
> Joe
> 
-- 
Ladislav Lhotka
Head, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67