IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [netmod] 6087bis namespace recommendations

Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz> Fri, 15 January 2016 14:19 UTC

Return-Path: <lhotka@nic.cz>
X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91ADD1B2D72 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 06:19:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.652
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.652 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HELO_EQ_CZ=0.445, HOST_EQ_CZ=0.904, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 MIBEK9ypty68 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 06:19:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.nic.cz (mail.nic.cz [217.31.204.67]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6100F1B2D70 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 06:19:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [IPv6:2001:718:1a02:1:48b6:50f4:321c:592d] (unknown [IPv6:2001:718:1a02:1:48b6:50f4:321c:592d]) by mail.nic.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9F473181C58; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 15:19:02 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=nic.cz; s=default; t=1452867542; bh=muaoezq1xYQwAg8Lv6QIB0bcfakere/MZfBgc6Dk3xA=; h=From:Date:To; b=Ph2RM0TZhKXzySx55Qz5GdjVBYlVdBuXFTLsR+3oF+4hQju53kaiU23FKNegYk6T7 bUdzyK9HgyBsg6PPeuWeasLzfPvPYmvoAygmn+06wT+p6dYR35YwFqDukiwTXIfzWv CzrEdo00b45bsd0E+2NbpKLlSzSNlLWuCI/as7is=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.2 \(3112\))
From: Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz>
In-Reply-To: <CABCOCHRrBSn7VX3dK54TZ_GES86ANn9xzzFQFue5sJF_d17EuQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 15:19:06 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <9DA7DD58-6890-4BC2-A7BE-6D6F15F1B08D@nic.cz>
References: <20160111.101526.1720014765007751699.mbj@tail-f.com> <20160111092831.GA41568@elstar.local> <20160111.112143.1731089672764861015.mbj@tail-f.com> <20160111104855.GA41658@elstar.local> <01d301d14ef1$814dcee0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <CABCOCHTXa-XTkY73QhM3gzFbx0zQ_a24hijCz2HOaOQ9odL9DA@mail.gmail.com> <m2oacnnkbf.fsf@birdie.labs.nic.cz> <20160115114924.GA12322@elstar.local> <301372A9-0333-4D56-B501-207C405C79F3@nic.cz> <CABCOCHRrBSn7VX3dK54TZ_GES86ANn9xzzFQFue5sJF_d17EuQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3112)
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.98.7 at mail
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/J8jzMs78OUFa13ZDr1oF42vqHZI>
Cc: "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [netmod] 6087bis namespace recommendations
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 14:19:06 -0000

> On 15 Jan 2016, at 15:10, Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 3:55 AM, Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz> wrote:
> 
> > On 15 Jan 2016, at 12:49, Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 12:39:16PM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> >>
> >> Does this solve any practical problem? Modules are imported based on
> >> the module name and revision. On the other hand, it does create new problems:
> >> namespace URIs and their mappings to prefixes may be spread in many
> >> places in the code, and these would have to be manually edited after an
> >> I-D -> RFC transition.
> >>
> >> It would IMO be much better to use revision numbers rather than dates,
> >> and adopt a convention, e.g., that modules in the I-D stage have
> >> revisions 0.x that get bumped with each new revision of the I-D.
> >>
> >
> > Lada, this is not how our current YANG 1.0 versioning and revision
> > rules work and we are not going to change them in YANG 1.1 either.
> > The rules we have do make a distinction between published modules and
> > modules that are unpublished.
> 
> I am not proposing it. The problem I'd like to get solved is proper module revisioning already at the I-D stage so that implementations be able to distinguish one revision from another. Appending DRAFT to the namespace URI doesn't help anything.
> 
> 
> 
> Changing the module name constantly does not help.
> It would be better to just keep using revision dates.

Some I-Ds don't do even that, for example acl-model uses the same revision date in subsequent I-D revisions. I checked that this actually violates a MUST in RFC 6087.

Lada

> 
> 
> Lada
> 
> 
> 
> Andy
>  
> >
> > /js
> >
> > --
> > Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
> > Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
> > Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>
> 
> --
> Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
> PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C

--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email