[netconf] RFC8525bis?

Benoit Claise <benoit.claise@huawei.com> Tue, 19 March 2024 04:59 UTC

Return-Path: <benoit.claise@huawei.com>
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 2119AC14F694 for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Mar 2024 21:59:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.11
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.11 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DC_PNG_UNO_LARGO=0.001, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_16=1.092, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=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 62zHnoRlZDuL for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Mar 2024 21:59:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com (frasgout.his.huawei.com [185.176.79.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 945D8C14F61E for <netconf@ietf.org>; Mon, 18 Mar 2024 21:59:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.18.186.216]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4TzKCS4gPKz6K8xd for <netconf@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Mar 2024 12:55:00 +0800 (CST)
Received: from frapeml500001.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.182.85.94]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 66573140519 for <netconf@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Mar 2024 12:59:16 +0800 (CST)
Received: from [10.47.153.95] (10.47.153.95) by frapeml500001.china.huawei.com (7.182.85.94) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.1.2507.35; Tue, 19 Mar 2024 05:59:11 +0100
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------By3JXbMSj0EPfT93p74wZBmo"
Message-ID: <a6e34bec-4f79-ecb3-d0ed-971e43053179@huawei.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2024 14:59:04 +1000
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.15.1
Content-Language: en-US
To: "netconf@ietf.org" <netconf@ietf.org>
From: Benoit Claise <benoit.claise@huawei.com>
X-Originating-IP: [10.47.153.95]
X-ClientProxiedBy: dggems705-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.182) To frapeml500001.china.huawei.com (7.182.85.94)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/auFfOkLZItdATL91IOiKz_mn1lA>
Subject: [netconf] RFC8525bis?
X-BeenThere: netconf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETCONF WG 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: Tue, 19 Mar 2024 04:59:24 -0000

Dear all,

In the context ofdraft-lincla-netconf-yang-library-augmentation 
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-lincla-netconf-yang-library-augmentation/>, 
there was  a brief discussion today during the NETCONF WG meeting 
regarding whether or not to specify a RFC8525bis? Basically, working 
from a revised ietf-yang-library with a typical deviation files 
expressing lack of support, as opposed to work with augmentations.
Note: in this case, an augmentation to support "augmented-by" ;-)

Looking at the YANG Catalog, I never realized that there were so many 
augmentations to the ietf-yang-library. I thought I would share this info




https://www.yangcatalog.org/yang-search/impact_analysis?rfcs=1&show_subm=1&show_dir=dependents&orgtags=ietf&modtags=ietf-yang-library.yang

Regards, Benoit