[netmod] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC6991 (7647)

RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Mon, 18 September 2023 11:24 UTC

Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfcpa.amsl.com>
X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF6E7C151981 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Sep 2023 04:24:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.467
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.467 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, CTE_8BIT_MISMATCH=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, RDNS_NONE=0.793, SPF_HELO_SOFTFAIL=0.732, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=unavailable 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 QgZBxcXmfvDD for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Sep 2023 04:23:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (unknown [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 89347C151709 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Mon, 18 Sep 2023 04:23:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by rfcpa.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 499) id 71E79E5EA7; Mon, 18 Sep 2023 04:23:59 -0700 (PDT)
To: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: david.martinezgarci@upm.es, j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de, netmod@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Message-Id: <20230918112359.71E79E5EA7@rfcpa.amsl.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2023 04:23:59 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/3ATdMsZr2KX7yqNphP6K4sPhQWU>
Subject: [netmod] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC6991 (7647)
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETMOD WG list <netmod.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netmod/>
List-Post: <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2023 11:24:04 -0000

The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6991,
"Common YANG Data Types".

--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid7647

--------------------------------------
Type: Editorial
Reported by: David Martínez García <david.martinezgarci@upm.es>

Section: 3

Original Text
-------------
[...]

typedef object-identifier-128 {
       type object-identifier {

[...]

(and other typedefs that appear in the latest revisions of the module)

Corrected Text
--------------
[...]

typedef object-identifier-128 {
       type yang:object-identifier {

[...]

(and other typedefs that appear in the latest revisions of the module)

Notes
-----
In Section 3, the textual definition of the "ietf-yang-types" module presents, in my opinion, inconsistencies when defining typedefs that point to other typedefs in the same module: sometimes the value for the "type" key contains the prefix of the module and sometimes not. Please, see the example attached. This can also be applied to other typedefs defined in the latest revisions of the module, such as "date-no-zone" and "time-no-zone". I think this should be addressed to provide clarification and consistency, and thus can be extended to other modules and the YANG standard as well. Thanks for your time.

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. 

--------------------------------------
RFC6991 (draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6021-bis-03)
--------------------------------------
Title               : Common YANG Data Types
Publication Date    : July 2013
Author(s)           : J. Schoenwaelder, Ed.
Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
Source              : Network Modeling
Area                : Operations and Management
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG