Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 (6855)
Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com> Thu, 17 February 2022 20:12 UTC
Return-Path: <andy@yumaworks.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 B0C453A1248 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Feb 2022 12:12:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.887
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.887 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=yumaworks-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hkTm_WBRa1LL for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Feb 2022 12:11:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lf1-x131.google.com (mail-lf1-x131.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::131]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9EA433A122A for <netmod@ietf.org>; Thu, 17 Feb 2022 12:11:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lf1-x131.google.com with SMTP id bu29so1460198lfb.0 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Thu, 17 Feb 2022 12:11:54 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yumaworks-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=1jkMm+muAC6OEMtYgDI8LeIaRZIPX7VLgOnHKyz+CDE=; b=LOCoB6QhExCp1uBTHbPxb2+uZOle3CM/EhjP6Vas+f+v3nE9ue1ITvdt5+/Gw994Gl 5U0zEt18nxSZuxg2w34RfxaenY4HDBoxqUtsoCQmoRlwbugvU48uhv7SleBuDYOieWNZ YOO+ozUfRf3AbA2bZezBVfu/4vqKu+FsnWMsplSaFnSCNu2N/KA4teGce9qcvyTT6l5w qec5FyfOgB3TVS5igcf7Pou34vtGuIQgTkHySXXrlWC555SiNGbOAMBABwkAimQvbeZH zeICIBKCOGd8ONwVWb9NcsIGdby6QMayse5bBQJrqx1R5p74VmdQcwPzYJYGBfQeoiMo /1xQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=1jkMm+muAC6OEMtYgDI8LeIaRZIPX7VLgOnHKyz+CDE=; b=ncmpS/3lW8BknjencJu54e9E5VnR/5YwrLwb98FyBc63b2/iKB4tOwjlo8S+Aq5oDU WXPaYAC11ZfyYv2NoOn5mCGsHrFyX1oaK+bifkKPjblYD2UFR5bCQmEegWmtqm+Oloc7 cP3K+1BIFe8GfLQAT2ms9Y4uRu/ET25eEPsjxHWceveBI1VNOxToyVMBf1v79OT4RQsr QJWvhXHwjBfDSlJe4QnCvQKd+99xX3yL11ow+4A6rR6cHr1tz9e5a+dv5Oh0kWfLYmF6 D1kj+uaJAnT4oQgj3e6/0PYyp6Yo9uEi0dRnGFZoJC4tAr/tJ24eeRP0RxsCNa/wA8g6 Vd4A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532I4kZV0jbudVno6DRRPUid1vYEmWf+Xxd9+xE0sjeO9dPPNTP4 DhJpMDDUgHuxlrXhX7wOdNai9jGr0N92xCUm7SiHXQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy4giKQSL0RRtXlSndrcnPeU5+HOj8mRbLYaV6BoAxcqSj0U2yabARVUW9V6iXAXvXGN9qbZYqaucfONSnZOaw=
X-Received: by 2002:a19:c50c:0:b0:442:8d4a:a6dc with SMTP id w12-20020a19c50c000000b004428d4aa6dcmr2979359lfe.635.1645128712010; Thu, 17 Feb 2022 12:11:52 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20220217185035.13A2F4C1D9@rfc-editor.org> <c342b121-efe9-30f0-22dd-f931e1378e79@alumni.stanford.edu>
In-Reply-To: <c342b121-efe9-30f0-22dd-f931e1378e79@alumni.stanford.edu>
From: Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2022 12:11:41 -0800
Message-ID: <CABCOCHRvoYL88Q5+GQOVgmo4vu1LmAiE5nDQFVFRhyk0a=+UGA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Randy Presuhn <randy_presuhn@alumni.stanford.edu>
Cc: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>, Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>, Robert Wilton <rwilton@cisco.com>, Joel Jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>, Kent Watsen <kent+ietf@watsen.net>, Berger Lou <lberger@labn.net>, as549r@att.com, NetMod WG <netmod@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000007d64d405d83c60e0"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/IvNIAjw1vVHa9yaUbQ3muzLeiCE>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 22 Feb 2022 09:16:05 -0800
Subject: Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 (6855)
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, 17 Feb 2022 20:12:01 -0000
On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 11:54 AM Randy Presuhn < randy_presuhn@alumni.stanford.edu> wrote: > Hi - > > This seems like a remarkably pointless change, and arguably > at odds with section 6 of RFC 2119. ("Imperatives of the type > defined in this memo must be used with care and sparingly.") > > +1 IMO RFC 2119 keywords MUST NOT be added, modified, or removed using an Errata. In this specific case, there is no ambiguity that needs to be corrected. > Randy > Andy > > On 2022-02-17 10:50 AM, RFC Errata System wrote: > > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7950, > > "The YANG 1.1 Data Modeling Language". > > > > -------------------------------------- > > You may review the report below and at: > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6855 > > > > -------------------------------------- > > Type: Technical > > Reported by: Alexei Sadovnikov <as549r@att.com> > > > > Section: GLOBAL > > > > Original Text > > ------------- > > 7.5. The "container" Statement > > 7.5.7. XML Encoding Rules > > > > A container node is encoded as an XML element. The element's local > > name is the container's identifier, and its namespace is the > module's > > XML namespace (see Section 7.1.3). > > > > The container's child nodes are encoded as subelements to the > > container element. If the container defines RPC or action input or > > output parameters, these subelements are encoded in the same order > as > > they are defined within the "container" statement. Otherwise, the > > subelements are encoded in any order. > > > > 7.8. The "list" Statement > > 7.8.5. XML Encoding Rules > > > > The list's key nodes are encoded as subelements to the list's > > identifier element, in the same order as they are defined within the > > "key" statement. > > > > The rest of the list's child nodes are encoded as subelements to the > > list element, after the keys. If the list defines RPC or action > > input or output parameters, the subelements are encoded in the same > > order as they are defined within the "list" statement. Otherwise, > > the subelements are encoded in any order. > > . . . . . > > > > 7.14. The "rpc" Statement > > 7.14.4. NETCONF XML Encoding Rules > > > > . . . . . > > > > Input parameters are encoded as child XML elements to the rpc node's > > XML element, in the same order as they are defined within the > "input" > > statement. > > > > If the RPC operation invocation succeeded and no output parameters > > are returned, the <rpc-reply> contains a single <ok/> element > defined > > in [RFC6241]. If output parameters are returned, they are encoded > as > > child elements to the <rpc-reply> element defined in [RFC6241], in > > the same order as they are defined within the "output" statement. > > > > > > 7.15. The "action" Statement > > 7.15.2. NETCONF XML Encoding Rules > > > > . . . . . > > > > The <action> element contains a hierarchy of nodes that identifies > > the node in the datastore. It MUST contain all containers and list > > nodes in the direct path from the top level down to the list or > > container containing the action. For lists, all key leafs MUST also > > be included. The innermost container or list contains an XML > element > > that carries the name of the defined action. Within this element, > > the input parameters are encoded as child XML elements, in the same > > order as they are defined within the "input" statement. > > > > . . . . . > > > > If the action operation invocation succeeded and no output > parameters > > are returned, the <rpc-reply> contains a single <ok/> element > defined > > in [RFC6241]. If output parameters are returned, they are encoded > as > > child elements to the <rpc-reply> element defined in [RFC6241], in > > the same order as they are defined within the "output" statement. > > > > > > Corrected Text > > -------------- > > 7.5. The "container" Statement > > 7.5.7. XML Encoding Rules > > > > . . . . . > > > > The container's child nodes are encoded as subelements to the > > container element. If the container defines RPC or action input or > > output parameters, these subelements MUST be encoded in the same > order as > > they are defined within the "container" statement. Otherwise, the > > subelements are encoded in any order. > > > > 7.8. The "list" Statement > > 7.8.5. XML Encoding Rules > > > > The list's key nodes MUST be encoded as subelements to the list's > > identifier element, in the same order as they are defined within the > > "key" statement. > > > > The rest of the list's child nodes are encoded as subelements to the > > list element, after the keys. If the list defines RPC or action > > input or output parameters, the subelements MUST be encoded in > the same > > order as they are defined within the "list" statement. Otherwise, > > the subelements are encoded in any order. > > . . . . . > > > > 7.14. The "rpc" Statement > > 7.14.4. NETCONF XML Encoding Rules > > > > . . . . . > > > > Input parameters MUST be encoded as child XML elements to the rpc > node's > > XML element, in the same order as they are defined within the > "input" > > statement. > > > > If the RPC operation invocation succeeded and no output parameters > > are returned, the <rpc-reply> contains a single <ok/> element > defined > > in [RFC6241]. If output parameters are returned, they MUST be > encoded as > > child elements to the <rpc-reply> element defined in [RFC6241], in > > the same order as they are defined within the "output" statement. > > > > > > 7.15. The "action" Statement > > 7.15.2. NETCONF XML Encoding Rules > > > > . . . . . > > > > The <action> element contains a hierarchy of nodes that identifies > > the node in the datastore. It MUST contain all containers and list > > nodes in the direct path from the top level down to the list or > > container containing the action. For lists, all key leafs MUST also > > be included. The innermost container or list contains an XML > element > > that carries the name of the defined action. Within this element, > > the input parameters MUST be encoded as child XML elements, in > the same > > order as they are defined within the "input" statement. > > > > . . . . . > > > > If the action operation invocation succeeded and no output > parameters > > are returned, the <rpc-reply> contains a single <ok/> element > defined > > in [RFC6241]. If output parameters are returned, they MUST be > encoded as > > child elements to the <rpc-reply> element defined in [RFC6241], in > > the same order as they are defined within the "output" statement. > > > > Notes > > ----- > > The RFC 2119 keywords are missing in description of ordering for XML > encoding rules for RPC, actions and references thereto and in additional > instance of list keys encoding. > > > > Although the text of RFC suggests reading this as if "MUST" was > present, without keyword it is open to interpretation if the sentences > actually mean "MUST" or "SHOULD" or may be even "MAY". > > > > In other places discussing ordering, for example 7.7.8., 7.8.5. and > 7.9.5. the "MUST" is actually present, hence proposed errata would make > ordering description usage of keywords consistent. > > > > 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. > > > > -------------------------------------- > > RFC7950 (draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis-14) > > -------------------------------------- > > Title : The YANG 1.1 Data Modeling Language > > Publication Date : August 2016 > > Author(s) : M. Bjorklund, Ed. > > Category : PROPOSED STANDARD > > Source : Network Modeling > > Area : Operations and Management > > Stream : IETF > > Verifying Party : IESG > > > > _______________________________________________ > > netmod mailing list > > netmod@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod > > _______________________________________________ > netmod mailing list > netmod@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod >
- [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 (685… RFC Errata System
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 … Randy Presuhn
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 … Randy Presuhn
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 … Kent Watsen
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 … Rob Wilton (rwilton)
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 … Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 … SADOVNIKOV, ALEXEI
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 … Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 … SADOVNIKOV, ALEXEI
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 … SADOVNIKOV, ALEXEI
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 … Sterne, Jason (Nokia - CA/Ottawa)
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 … Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 … Martin Björklund
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 … Rob Wilton (rwilton)
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 … Sterne, Jason (Nokia - CA/Ottawa)
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 … SADOVNIKOV, ALEXEI
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 … SADOVNIKOV, ALEXEI
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 … Sterne, Jason (Nokia - CA/Ottawa)
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 … Jürgen Schönwälder
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 … Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 … SADOVNIKOV, ALEXEI
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 … Kent Watsen
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 … Martin Björklund
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 … Jernej Tuljak
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 … SADOVNIKOV, ALEXEI
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 … Carsten Bormann
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 … Jürgen Schönwälder
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 … Andy Bierman