[i2rs] [Errata Held for Document Update] RFC8542 (7056)
RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Wed, 07 September 2022 13:31 UTC
Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfcpa.amsl.com>
X-Original-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AF9BC15257F; Wed, 7 Sep 2022 06:31:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.658
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.658 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=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=ham autolearn_force=no
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 5RngzA81k1o2; Wed, 7 Sep 2022 06:31:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (rfc-editor.org [50.223.129.200]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 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 B6AFCC15271E; Wed, 7 Sep 2022 06:31:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by rfcpa.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 499) id 9A4F3877D9; Wed, 7 Sep 2022 06:31:52 -0700 (PDT)
To: jlindbla@cisco.com, zhuangyan.zhuang@huawei.com, shidanian@huawei.com, gurong_cmcc@outlook.com, hari@netflix.com
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: aretana.ietf@gmail.com, iesg@ietf.org, i2rs@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Message-Id: <20220907133152.9A4F3877D9@rfcpa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2022 06:31:52 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/i2rs/zSILm_p7pfcdCs3qJ1NYFkm7rXc>
Subject: [i2rs] [Errata Held for Document Update] RFC8542 (7056)
X-BeenThere: i2rs@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Interface to The Internet Routing System \(IRS\)" <i2rs.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/i2rs>, <mailto:i2rs-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/i2rs/>
List-Post: <mailto:i2rs@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:i2rs-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs>, <mailto:i2rs-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2022 13:31:56 -0000
The following errata report has been held for document update for RFC8542, "A YANG Data Model for Fabric Topology in Data-Center Networks". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid7056 -------------------------------------- Status: Held for Document Update Type: Technical Reported by: Jan Lindblad <jlindbla@cisco.com> Date Reported: 2022-07-29 Held by: Alvaro Retana (IESG) Section: 4 Original Text ------------- augment "/nw:networks/nw:network/nw:node/nt:termination-point" { when '/nw:networks/nw:network/nw:network-types/' + 'fabric:fabric-network' { description "Augmentation parameters apply only for networks with fabric topology"; } Corrected Text -------------- augment "/nw:networks/nw:network/nw:node/nt:termination-point" { when '../../nw:network-types/fabric:fabric-network' { description "Augmentation parameters apply only for networks with fabric topology"; } Notes ----- The original YANG statements make the augmentation apply to all nw:networks as soon as there is at least one nw:network that is of fabric:fabric-network topo. This is clearly not the author's intent, as proven by the text in the description statement. The corrected YANG statements make the augmentation only apply to the specific nw:networks that are of fabric topology. There are also other ways to fix this issue. === [AD Note] I believe that the original intent was as shown in the corrected text. However, the resolution is not straightforward, and an update may require further consideration in light of the current rules (rfc7950). Therefore, I am marking this report as "Hold for Document Update" [1]. [1] https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/processing-errata-ietf-stream/ -------------------------------------- RFC8542 (draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-dc-fabric-network-topology-12) -------------------------------------- Title : A YANG Data Model for Fabric Topology in Data-Center Networks Publication Date : March 2019 Author(s) : Y. Zhuang, D. Shi, R. Gu, H. Ananthakrishnan Category : PROPOSED STANDARD Source : Interface to the Routing System Area : Routing Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG
- [i2rs] [Errata Held for Document Update] RFC8542 … RFC Errata System