[netmod] IANA registries

Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz> Thu, 10 October 2019 11:49 UTC

Return-Path: <lhotka@nic.cz>
X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9829E120C2E for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 04:49:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.997
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.997 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nic.cz
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jQVQ-ndjxNlx for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 04:49:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.nic.cz (mail.nic.cz [IPv6:2001:1488:800:400::400]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D9E01120C0E for <netmod@ietf.org>; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 04:49:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from birdie (unknown [IPv6:2001:1488:fffe:6:a744:2697:a0ec:a420]) by mail.nic.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C82AA140E2D for <netmod@ietf.org>; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 13:49:22 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=nic.cz; s=default; t=1570708162; bh=rcaSnzuv/TgHluwPAgpWMkGI268J4gDcdxlHjhnNjTE=; h=From:To:Date; b=hQZLgL83Lj9iOsrilBvmWXE647AqgIx6dk6TqycBlOzBTGVB6LVd9+nRJ0zZBRxYm kz/cyu+5x53xtaHHOy/Q0cD8Katfk8yXxT8Jx7t2utDPRQREazsi9/xcDFNGecu6QU DpE/Box8TzAiDpfYmhxA10vywuAG/dfTKgMyUBIQ=
Message-ID: <64c9cd72e94621afcff099e1cda69fdacd27b04a.camel@nic.cz>
From: Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz>
To: netmod@ietf.org
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 13:49:22 +0200
Organization: CZ.NIC
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.34.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.100.3 at mail.nic.cz
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/IAnCZ1TrWFgwXbhcJDoKxtcY4Y0>
Subject: [netmod] IANA registries
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 11:49:28 -0000


some of you have probably seen the discussions around


We proposed to adopt it as a work item in the DNSOP WG, but despite some support
this is probably not going to happen. The substantial objections are:

1. It is not good to publish a YANG snapshot of an IANA registry as an RFC
because future implementors will use the module from that RFC and implement
registry entries that may have been deprecated in the mean time. 

2. The meaning of "deprecated" and "obsolete" defined by IANA (RFC 8126) differs
from the definition in RFC 7950.

I already raised #2 in this mailing list, and I think it should be addressed in
the next version of YANG.

Regarding #1, I tried to explain that the RFC is only intended to contain an
initial revision of the corresponding YANG module, but it didn't help. One
suggestion was to avoid representing the registries as enumerations or sets of
identities, and use only integers.

I wonder if we can come up with a reasonable solution. Without having the
important registries as YANG modules, it is difficult to work on other modules -
for DNS, in this case, but it could apply to other areas, too.

Thanks, Lada

Ladislav Lhotka
Head, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67