Re: [netconf] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8525 (6484)

[Martin Björklund <[e-mail]>]

Juergen Schoenwaelder <[e-mail]> wrote:
> A more revelant question is whether we can build tooling to spot these
> kind of errors in order to prevent them from happening again in the
> future.

I think that this would have to be somthing that integrates in the RFC
editor's current checking of YANG modules.  It is of course trivial to
check this provided that there exists a "repo" of published modules.
(and I *think* that the RFC editor actually has such a repo in the
form of a directory...)




/martin




> 
> /js
> 
> On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 11:32:28AM +0100, Jan Lindblad wrote:
> > Martin,
> > 
> > >> Rob, Martin,
> > >> 
> > >> Wouldn't changing the revision date be a massively
> > >> non-backwards-compatible change?
> > > 
> > > Note that this is in the revision history list.
> > 
> > I understand. Do you consider changing the revision history a backwards compatible change that clients, servers and tools should reasonably be able to cope with?
> > 
> > >> Anyone might be importing this module by revision, and tools could be hardcoded towards the revision date, given that this is a pretty fundamental module.
> > >> 
> > >> What is the (technical) benefit of changing the date?
> > > 
> > > The idea is that if we ever do a new version of this module, we fix
> > > the revision history list in that new version.
> > 
> > Yes, the description of the idea was clear. I see some potential trouble doing this, and so far I haven't been able to think of any use case that would benefit from a change. Is there any?
> > 
> > Correct information is always nice, but changing module identification data also leads to confusion. I don't think we should change it unless someone can point to some benefits that outweigh the cost.
> > 
> > Best Regards,
> > /jan
> > 
> > 
> > >>> Hi Martin,
> > >>> 
> > >>> I agree, hold for doc update seems appropriate.
> > >>> 
> > >>> Any other comments?
> > >>> 
> > >>> Regards,
> > >>> Rob
> > >>> 
> > >>> 
> > >>>> -----Original Message-----
> > >>>> From: Martin Björklund <[e-mail]>
> > >>>> Sent: 15 March 2021 09:24
> > >>>> To: [e-mail]
> > >>>> Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]; j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-
> > >>>> university.de; [e-mail]; Rob Wilton (rwilton)
> > >>>> <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; [e-mail];
> > >>>> [e-mail]
> > >>>> Subject: Re: [netconf] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8525 (6484)
> > >>>> 
> > >>>> Hi,
> > >>>> 
> > >>>> Wow, this is obviously a bug.
> > >>>> 
> > >>>> I am not sure it can be fixed with an errata however.  Perhaps "hold
> > >>>> for document update"?
> > >>>> 
> > >>>> 
> > >>>> /martin
> > >>>> 
> > >>>> 
> > >>>> RFC Errata System <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > >>>>> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC8525,
> > >>>>> "YANG Library".
> > >>>>> 
> > >>>>> --------------------------------------
> > >>>>> You may review the report below and at:
> > >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6484
> > >>>>> 
> > >>>>> --------------------------------------
> > >>>>> Type: Technical
> > >>>>> Reported by: Jernej Tuljak <[e-mail]>
> > >>>>> 
> > >>>>> Section: 4
> > >>>>> 
> > >>>>> Original Text
> > >>>>> -------------
> > >>>>>    revision 2016-04-09 {
> > >>>>>      description
> > >>>>>        "Initial revision.";
> > >>>>>      reference
> > >>>>>        "RFC 7895: YANG Module Library";
> > >>>>>    }
> > >>>>> 
> > >>>>> Corrected Text
> > >>>>> --------------
> > >>>>>    revision 2016-06-21 {
> > >>>>>      description
> > >>>>>        "Initial revision.";
> > >>>>>      reference
> > >>>>>        "RFC 7895: YANG Module Library";
> > >>>>>    }
> > >>>>> 
> > >>>>> Notes
> > >>>>> -----
> > >>>>> Initial revision of ietf-yang-library YANG module was 2016-06-21, not
> > >>>> 2016-04-09.
> > >>>>> 
> > >>>>> Instructions:
> > >>>>> -------------
> > >>>>> This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please
> > >>>>> use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
> > >>>>> rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party
> > >>>>> can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.
> > >>>>> 
> > >>>>> --------------------------------------
> > >>>>> RFC8525 (draft-ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis-07)
> > >>>>> --------------------------------------
> > >>>>> Title               : YANG Library
> > >>>>> Publication Date    : March 2019
> > >>>>> Author(s)           : A. Bierman, M. Bjorklund, J. Schoenwaelder, K.
> > >>>> Watsen, R. Wilton
> > >>>>> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> > >>>>> Source              : Network Configuration
> > >>>>> Area                : Operations and Management
> > >>>>> Stream              : IETF
> > >>>>> Verifying Party     : IESG
> > >>>>> 
> > >>>>> _______________________________________________
> > >>>>> netconf mailing list
> > >>>>> [e-mail]
> > >>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf
> > >>> 
> > >>> _______________________________________________
> > >>> netconf mailing list
> > >>> [e-mail]
> > >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf
> > >>> 
> > >> 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > netconf mailing list
> > [e-mail]
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf
> 
> -- 
> Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
> Phone: [phone]         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
> Fax:   [phone]         <https://www.jacobs-university.de/>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> netconf mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf