Re: [Netconf] Last Call: <draft-ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis-06.txt> (YANG Library) to Proposed Standard

Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> Mon, 30 July 2018 20:21 UTC

Return-Path: <lberger@labn.net>
X-Original-To: netconf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netconf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA666124D68 for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 Jul 2018 13:21:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (768-bit key) header.d=labn.net
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 TLDmExTVXEOW for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 Jul 2018 13:21:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gproxy8-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com (gproxy8-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com [67.222.33.93]) (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 97573130E07 for <netconf@ietf.org>; Mon, 30 Jul 2018 13:21:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cmgw15.unifiedlayer.com (unknown [10.9.0.15]) by gproxy8.mail.unifiedlayer.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DA9E1AE4EB for <netconf@ietf.org>; Mon, 30 Jul 2018 14:19:43 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from box313.bluehost.com ([69.89.31.113]) by cmsmtp with ESMTP id kEdrfotzbj0sokEdrf0ypl; Mon, 30 Jul 2018 14:19:43 -0600
X-Authority-Reason: nr=8
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=labn.net; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version :Date:Message-ID:From:References:Cc:To:Subject:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=rraAFyyJL86zW1b02HqstlVY4Y/BEpj9UY6u65oaBBM=; b=qejqFqwFdJrfnJnFTpP3VHN0Ja GkqjPaPkjdqzJdN+rO81+niiVP8RSagojEYUbNmzi8S8yGfERWdVzOS/6fEZ9v8KrjyCSoDeKfvXq UEvKqhX+0XFV+QLlGcRFjpI8P;
Received: from pool-100-15-106-211.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([100.15.106.211]:55634 helo=[IPv6:::1]) by box313.bluehost.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.91) (envelope-from <lberger@labn.net>) id 1fkEdq-0001lv-TA; Mon, 30 Jul 2018 14:19:42 -0600
To: Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com>
Cc: ietf@ietf.org, Ignas Bagdonas <ibagdona@gmail.com>, netconf-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis@ietf.org, netconf@ietf.org
References: <152899335818.26447.7759890925422555917.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <9ad91163-ca97-5db1-1f6d-e365f819db10@labn.net> <5363EB75-95BC-4407-9BFA-3D97EAC440D3@gmail.com>
From: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
Message-ID: <114e3335-a976-4a84-58e0-8817a06324c1@labn.net>
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2018 16:19:41 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5363EB75-95BC-4407-9BFA-3D97EAC440D3@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - box313.bluehost.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - labn.net
X-BWhitelist: no
X-Source-IP: 100.15.106.211
X-Source-L: No
X-Exim-ID: 1fkEdq-0001lv-TA
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-Source-Sender: pool-100-15-106-211.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([IPv6:::1]) [100.15.106.211]:55634
X-Source-Auth: lberger@labn.net
X-Email-Count: 7
X-Source-Cap: bGFibm1vYmk7bGFibm1vYmk7Ym94MzEzLmJsdWVob3N0LmNvbQ==
X-Local-Domain: yes
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/TGcBuF8bktyg8aycxZCtuZKkbpY>
Subject: Re: [Netconf] Last Call: <draft-ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis-06.txt> (YANG Library) to Proposed Standard
X-BeenThere: netconf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
Precedence: list
List-Id: Network Configuration WG mailing list <netconf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netconf>, <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netconf/>
List-Post: <mailto:netconf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf>, <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2018 20:21:39 -0000

Hi,


On 7/30/2018 4:10 PM, Mahesh Jethanandani wrote:
> Hi Lou,
>
>> On Jul 30, 2018, at 10:01 AM, Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>>      I have a late comment on this document that I discovered while reviewing draft-ietf-netconf-nmda-netconf.  Sorry about the timing, but better to make the comment now rather then as an errata...
>>
>> This document says:
>>     All NETCONF servers supporting YANG 1.1 [RFC7950] are required to
>>     support YANG Library (see Section 5.6.4 of RFC 7950).  NETCONF
>>     servers implementing the NETCONF extensions to support the NMDA
>>     [I-D.ietf-netconf-nmda-netconf] MUST implement at least the version
>>     of the YANG library defined in this document.  Similarly, all
>>     RESTCONF servers are required to support YANG Library (see Section 10
>>     of RFC 8040).  RESTCONF servers implementing the RESTCONF extensions
>>     to support the NMDA [I-D.ietf-netconf-nmda-restconf] MUST implement
>>     at least the version of the YANG library defined in this document.
>>
>> I read this as an  update to RFC7950 and this should be noted in the document header, the abstract and Intro.
> Your read of the update to RFC7950 is that it should now reference rfc7895bis in Section 5.6.4. Is that correct? How is that different from 7895bis obsoleting 7895, and thus all references to 7895 should now be to 7895bis?
All this means is that  draft-ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis should note it 
updates RFC 7950 in the header and abstract...

Lou

>> Lou
>>
>>
>> On 6/14/2018 12:22 PM, The IESG wrote:
>>> The IESG has received a request from the Network Configuration WG (netconf)
>>> to consider the following document: - 'YANG Library'
>>>    <draft-ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis-06.txt> as Proposed Standard
>>>
>>> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final
>>> comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
>>> ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2018-06-28. Exceptionally, comments may be
>>> sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the beginning of
>>> the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
>>>
>>> Abstract
>>>
>>>
>>>     This document describes a YANG library that provides information
>>>     about the YANG modules, datastores, and datastore schemas used by a
>>>     network management server.  Simple caching mechanisms are provided to
>>>     allow clients to minimize retrieval of this information.  This
>>>     version of the YANG library supports the Network Management Datastore
>>>     Architecture by listing all datastores supported by a network
>>>     management server and the schema that is used by each of these
>>>     datastores.
>>>
>>>     This document obsoletes RFC 7895.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The file can be obtained via
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis/
>>>
>>> IESG discussion can be tracked via
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis/ballot/
>>>
>>>
>>> No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Netconf mailing list
>>> Netconf@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf
>>>
> Mahesh Jethanandani
> mjethanandani@gmail.com
>
>