Re: [netmod] Obsolete feature - what does it mean?

[Kent Watsen <[e-mail]>]

> On Feb 27, 2019, at 11:48 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 04:09:17PM +0000, Kent Watsen wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On Feb 27, 2019, at 6:16 AM, Balázs Lengyel <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> feature oldFeature {
>>>  status obsolete;
>>> }
>>> leaf myTimer {
>>>  if-feature oldFeature ;
>>>  mandatory true;
>>>  config true;
>>>  status current;
>>>  type string;
>>> }
>>> So should I configure myTimer or not? I assume yes, correct?
>> 
>> This issue is captured here: https://github.com/netmod-wg/yang-next/issues/27, which was updated as of this morning with this very example.
>> 
>> Of course, the problem is in RFC 7950:
>> 
>>   o  "obsolete" means that the definition is obsolete and SHOULD NOT be
>>      implemented and/or can be removed from implementations.
>> 
>> I recommend replacing "SHOULD NOT be implemented" with "is not implemented".
> 
> When an IETF WG decides to obsolete something, I am forced to break
> old clients because of this decision? Note sure this makes business
> sense (says an academic).
> 
> There is a huge difference between modules where the implementors have
> change control over the modules and modules where change control is
> far outside the implementors hands and where clients and servers are
> implemented by different organizations in an open and largely
> uncoordinated way. We always have to keep this in mind when we create
> rules.
> 
> The SHOULD NOT allows a server implementor to take a well-informed
> decision that there are old clients you care about and that this makes
> a business case for supporting obsolete definitions on a server.
> 
> Another aspect here is that we do not make a clear distinction between
> server and client. It can very well be that "deprecated" and
> "obsolete" mean slightly different things to servers and
> clients. (Servers tend to have a natural desire to not break clients
> unnecessarily.)



But a server can choose to not implement that revision of the module or, with https://github.com/netmod-wg/yang-next/issues/63 <https://github.com/netmod-wg/yang-next/issues/63> deviate the "status" statement.

I want "obsolete" to mean as it does everywhere else: out of use, no longer supported, not expected to work, etc.

Perhaps there is a line between having "status obsolete" versus disappearing the node altogether?   Maybe within the same "major" version (to use a sem-ver term), "obsolete" leaves it to the server's discretion, whereas the next major version disappears the node?

If so, then there should be a way for the server to indicate which discretionary choices it made.   I'd suggest that "obsolete" defaults to "not-implemented" and thus only servers that want to continue support for the node need to indicate anything.  A deviation would be a good fit for this.

Kent // contributor