[Ivy] Data type for mfg-date in base inventory model
Italo Busi <Italo.Busi@huawei.com> Sat, 10 October 2026 10:40 UTC
Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com (frasgout.his.huawei.com [185.176.79.56]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange x25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mx.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EEB7846 for <ivy@ietf.org>; Sat, 10 Oct 2026 10:40:09 +0000 (UTC)
Authentication-Results: mx.ietf.org; dkim=pass header.d=huawei.com header.s=dkim header.b=cWnQHmLJ; spf=pass (mx.ietf.org: domain of Italo.Busi@huawei.com designates 185.176.79.56 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=Italo.Busi@huawei.com; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=huawei.com
dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=huawei.com; s=dkim; c=relaxed/relaxed; q=dns/txt; h=From; bh=QeYpWI7kUFTlbHBMRnxwwpEH7Vc52HuUCIjRE7I+Fq4=; b=cWnQHmLJZpQz1RUctIsvn14HZhjUoim8AbvqYUBWVMoZwFNMqna7CdbKDJ3597ZNmIJOl8BJQ Cdp6rQZu6b2pp4LJudCl2GTAZlXdJgtyxlPmw0eF28qgCWy5H1PXWe7uhbjbJjg3my3JG3Me0NB 76RKVvUy9H+R1xbPuQSbRHI=
Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.18.224.150]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTPS id 4j20bV4RP9zJ467c for <ivy@ietf.org>; Sat, 10 Oct 2026 18:39:34 +0800 (CST)
Received: from dubpeml100003.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.214.147.98]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 877A240572 for <ivy@ietf.org>; Sat, 10 Oct 2026 18:40:07 +0800 (CST)
Received: from dubpeml500004.china.huawei.com (7.214.147.1) by dubpeml100003.china.huawei.com (7.214.147.98) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.2562.46; Sat, 10 Oct 2026 11:40:06 +0100
Received: from dubpeml500004.china.huawei.com ([7.214.147.1]) by dubpeml500004.china.huawei.com ([7.214.147.1]) with mapi id 15.02.2562.046; Sat, 10 Oct 2026 11:40:06 +0100
From: Italo Busi <Italo.Busi@huawei.com>
To: "ivy@ietf.org" <ivy@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Data type for mfg-date in base inventory model
Thread-Index: Ad1Yos8fMXzP2VuxRbWSKRtHLlpprQ==
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2026 10:40:06 +0000
Message-ID: <f925103687104772a662c2fde6b892ad@huawei.com>
Accept-Language: it-IT, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.45.145.64]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_f925103687104772a662c2fde6b892adhuaweicom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Spamd-Bar: ------------------
Message-ID-Hash: FIP426C3DZW3LFLYQMXPLLP6UDKGML2R
X-Message-ID-Hash: FIP426C3DZW3LFLYQMXPLLP6UDKGML2R
X-MailFrom: Italo.Busi@huawei.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; loop; banned-address; emergency; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10
Precedence: list
Subject: [Ivy] Data type for mfg-date in base inventory model
List-Id: Network Inventory YANG Working Group <ivy.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ivy/SCfbSWsO5fNK0ChE0UiR_x0U2NI>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ivy>
List-Help: <mailto:ivy-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:ivy-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:ivy@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:ivy-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ivy-leave@ietf.org>
Hi IVY WG, We have got an Telechat Intdir review comment about the data type for the mfg-date: * mfg-date type uses yang:date-and-time. Time of day is meaningless for manufacturing date. Is yang:date a more proper type? We discussed this comment during the weekly call this Wednesday and agreed that this comment requires some discussion on the list We noted that OpenConfig define this attribute as a date, while RFC8348 define it as a date-and-time (but the description mentions just date). TAPI also defines this attribute as date-and-time. It has also been noted that date-and-time definition in ISO 8601 (referenced by RFC9911) allows omitting the time information (e.g., when not known or applicable). Our proposal is therefore to keep the date-and-time since it is more versatile and may be cover cases, e.g., software inventory, where the time is needed. Is this resolution ok for the WG? Thinking further, I am wondering whether it is worthwhile adding some clarification text in section 3.3 since it seems not very trivial to understand that the time information can be omitted Thanks, Italo (on behalf of co-authors/contributors)
- [Ivy] Data type for mfg-date in base inventory mo… Italo Busi
- [Ivy] Re: Data type for mfg-date in base inventor… Roberto Manzotti