Re: [netmod] Joint WGLC on "semver" and "module-versioning" drafts

[tom petch <[e-mail]>]

From: netmod <[e-mail]> on behalf of Jürgen Schönwälder <[e-mail]>
Sent: 04 June 2023 18:42

On Sun, Jun 04, 2023 at 07:01:16PM +0200, Carsten Bormann wrote:
> On 2023-06-02, at 18:37, Jürgen Schönwälder <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> > I am not aware of an official authoritative source of YANG files.
>
> I’m not sure I understand the current discussion, but wouldn't
>
> curl -s https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9127.xml | xmlstarlet sel -T -t -v "//sourcecode[@name='[e-mail]']/text()”
>
> be considered an authoritative source for that YANG file in that RFC?

There are many ways to extract YANG modules from RFCs and the results
they produce are not necessarily byte-level identical. So far this was
not considered necessary. Before people go and try to engineer a
solution, it may be useful to understand why solving this problem is
relevant or important.

<tp>
One (hypothetical) requirement would be to have a canonical form for checking for any changes, for producing a signature file for ease of such checks.  .doc with its thousands of ways of producing the same visual output was deemed adequate by many until .pdf came along and now the latter would be the one I would expect to be regarded as indispensable.

True the RFC provides that in a sense but with hundreds of pages of YANG in some RFC of hundreds of pages, and with a YANG module having a life way outside the IETF, then there could be a case for a canonical form of just the YANG.  A canonical tool to strip the YANG from the RFC could do that but at present I cannot see any one tool being given such  status.

Tom Petch

/js

--
Jürgen Schönwälder              Constructor University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: [phone]         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
Fax:   [phone]         <https://constructor.university/>

_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod