Re: [netmod] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7950 (5642)

Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com> Mon, 09 September 2019 07:38 UTC

Return-Path: <mbj@tail-f.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 6514D1200B2 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Sep 2019 00:38:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 dWK2Skdatnff for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Sep 2019 00:38:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.tail-f.com (mail.tail-f.com [46.21.102.45]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 927B51200C5 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Sep 2019 00:38:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (unknown [173.38.220.41]) by mail.tail-f.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 45C2A1AE0118; Mon, 9 Sep 2019 09:38:05 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Mon, 09 Sep 2019 09:37:41 +0200
Message-Id: <20190909.093741.128094169571185151.mbj@tail-f.com>
To: warren@kumari.net
Cc: andy@yumaworks.com, peter.loborg@ericsson.com, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, ibagdona@gmail.com, netmod@ietf.org
From: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHw9_iLb8Bf6ntnjM+c5bxawTkvw3Q0opr5wgAwvnWLOoHnpAA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20190221.193325.152438307014996574.mbj@tail-f.com> <CABCOCHSx50uOPeF6AXYsobe2uPBMrx4pkFnHr7GKMTJpq-HR2Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAHw9_iLb8Bf6ntnjM+c5bxawTkvw3Q0opr5wgAwvnWLOoHnpAA@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Mew version 6.7 on Emacs 25.2 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/L3rZ7qFjnpsPeRJ4FfJZegWXdig>
Subject: Re: [netmod] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7950 (5642)
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: Mon, 09 Sep 2019 07:38:09 -0000

Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 1:53 PM Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 10:33 AM Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com> wrote:
> >> > On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 10:07 AM Peter Loborg <peter.loborg@ericsson.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > Your example is fine – but the gammar is ch14 specifies something
> >> > > different:
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > enum-stmt           = enum-keyword sep string optsep
> >> > >
> >> > >                          (";" /
> >> > >
> >> > >                           "{" stmtsep
> >> > >
> >> > >                               ;; these stmts can appear in any order
> >> > >
> >> > >                               *if-feature-stmt
> >> > >
> >> > >                               [value-stmt]
> >> > >
> >> > >                               [status-stmt]
> >> > >
> >> > >                               [description-stmt]
> >> > >
> >> > >                               [reference-stmt]
> >> > >
> >> > >                            "}") stmtsep
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > It clearly states  string, not quoted-string. These two have the following
> >> > > rules:
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > quoted-string       = (DQUOTE string DQUOTE) / (SQUOTE string SQUOTE)
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > string              = < an unquoted string, as returned by >
> >> > >
> >> > >                          < the scanner, that matches the rule >
> >> > >
> >> > >                          < yang-string >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > The text in 9.6.4 is correct.
> >> > The ABNF is wrong.
> >>
> >> No, the ABNF is correct.  The ABNF doens't handle concatenation etc.
> >> The idea is that the scanner handles quotes and concatenation and
> >> returns a "string".
> >>
> >
> >
> > OK -- it is confusing that the rule quoted-string exists, but it
> > is only for key and leaf-list predicates.
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I'm trying to go through and do some cleanup of the dangling Errata.
> I'm *certainly* not an expert here, and so am relying on y'all.
> From what I've been able to figure out, the consensus is that this
> Errata should be rejected, yes?

Yes.


/martin


> W
> 
> 
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> /martin
> >>
> >
> > Andy
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > > …and in 6.1.3 we can read that:
> >> > >
> >> > >    An unquoted string is any sequence of characters that does not
> >> > >
> >> > >    contain any space, tab, carriage return, or line feed characters, a
> >> > >
> >> > >    single or double quote character, a semicolon (";"), braces ("{" or
> >> > >
> >> > >    "}"), or comment sequences ("//", "/*", or "*/").
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >    Note that any keyword can legally appear as an unquoted string.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > Since the section so clearly writes about single quoted strings and double
> >> > > quoted strings, there can unfortunately be no interpretation that would
> >> > > allow “identifier” to be called an unquoted string – even though it follows
> >> > > the rules about limited character contents.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > Hence – this is not a matter of opinion – it’s a matter of reading what’s
> >> > > actually written in the RFC.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > But on the subject of opinion…
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >       enum "This is also legal";   // should definitely always be illegal
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > …as we cannot create a language binding to enum constructs in any major
> >> > > programming languages.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > There are many aspects of YANG that do not map directly to programming
> >> > languages,
> >> > such as allowing '.' in identifiers.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > > Br,
> >> > >
> >> > > Peter
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Andy
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > *From:* Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>
> >> > > *Sent:* den 21 februari 2019 18:45
> >> > > *To:* Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
> >> > > *Cc:* RFC Editor <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>; Ignas Bagdonas <
> >> > > ibagdona@gmail.com>; NetMod WG <netmod@ietf.org>; Peter Loborg <
> >> > > peter.loborg@ericsson.com>; Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>
> >> > > *Subject:* Re: [netmod] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7950 (5642)
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 8:53 AM Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> 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:
> >> > > > http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5642
> >> > > >
> >> > > > --------------------------------------
> >> > > > Type: Editorial
> >> > > > Reported by: Peter Loborg <peter.loborg@ericsson.com>
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Section: 9.6.4
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Original Text
> >> > > > -------------
> >> > > > It takes as an argument a string that is the assigned name.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Corrected Text
> >> > > > --------------
> >> > > > It takes as an argument an unquoted string that is the assigned name.
> >> > >
> >> > > This is not correct.  The enum argument is not different from any
> >> > > other keyword's arguments in YANG.  See e.g. the example in 9.12.4:
> >> > >
> >> > >        type enumeration {
> >> > >          enum "unbounded";
> >> > >        }
> >> > >
> >> > > The following is also legal:
> >> > >
> >> > >          enum "unb" + 'ounded';
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >   enum "This is also legal";
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > 9.6.4.  The "enum" Statement
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >    The "enum" statement, which is a substatement to the "type"
> >> > >
> >> > >    statement, MUST be present if the type is "enumeration".  It is
> >> > >
> >> > >    repeatedly used to specify each assigned name of an enumeration type.
> >> > >
> >> > >    It takes as an argument a string that is the assigned name.  *The*
> >> > >
> >> > > *   string MUST NOT be zero-length and MUST NOT have any leading or*
> >> > >
> >> > > *   trailing whitespace characters* (any Unicode character with the
> >> > >
> >> > >    "White_Space" property).  The use of Unicode control codes SHOULD be
> >> > >
> >> > >    avoided.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > This errata should be rejected.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > /martin
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > Andy
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Notes
> >> > > > -----
> >> > > > Readers are not beeing made aware that careful reading of section 6.1.3
> >> > > and the detailed definition of string in section 14 must be consulted.
> >> > > > For comming versions of this RFC it would be preferable to use a more
> >> > > specialized grammar token for these cases (e.g. unquoted-string).
> >> > > >
> >> > > > 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
> >> > >
> >> > >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
> idea in the first place.
> This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
> regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
> of pants.
>    ---maf
>