Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6020 (4911) - what next?

[Lou Berger <[e-mail]>]

I think we need something.  BTW I'm fine with obsoletes ;-)


On 1/23/2017 12:08 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
> Lou,
>
> RFC 7950 does not update anything in RFC 6020.
>
> In hindsight, the proper tag would have been 'Obsoletes: RFC 6020' but
> that was considered too 'aggressive' at that time and now it is too
> late to put it in.
>
> I suggest to leave it alone. People who simply google 'yang rfc' will
> hopefully find the latest version. ;-)
>
> /js
>
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 11:09:53AM -0500, Lou Berger wrote:
>> How do you feel about an errata on 1.0 that it should be considered to
>> be updated by 1.1?
>>
>> Lou
>>
>>
>> On 1/23/2017 6:08 AM, Benoit Claise wrote:
>>> On 1/23/2017 11:46 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
>>>> Benoit,
>>>>
>>>> RFC 6020 is ambiguous and this is just how it is. The solution for
>>>> YANG 1 is simply to give advice to module writers to avoid ambiguous
>>>> character sequences (and avoiding ambiguity can be easily done).
>>>>
>>>> YANG 1.1 fixes the ambiguity in YANG 1 but backporting this fix to
>>>> YANG 1 is a change of YANG 1, i.e., it might turn a conforming
>>>> implementation into a non-conforming implementation. Hence, this may
>>>> go beyond the scope of an errata.
>>>>
>>>> If tools generate proper warnings, I think we are fine and we do not
>>>> need to change YANG 1. These kind of issues are caught by tools, not
>>>> by humans reading language specifications.
>>>>
>>>> If you feel strongly that an errata is needed, then the errata should
>>>> simply clearly spell out that certain backslahs sequences are
>>>> ambiguous and provide advice that they should not be used.
>>> That would work.
>>> Can we modify the errata this way.
>>>
>>> Regards, Benoit
>>>> This is
>>>> backwards compatible. Making them illegal is not backwards compatible.
>>>>
>>>> /js
>>>>
>>>> PS: This is also my recollection of the discussion of issue Y06 when
>>>>      YANG 1.1 was put together.
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 11:29:25AM +0100, Benoit Claise wrote:
>>>>> Dear all,
>>>>>
>>>>> Let me summarize the situation.
>>>>>      - The RFC 6020 spec is clearly ambiguous.
>>>>>      - The solution is to use YANG 1.1
>>>>>      - RFC 7950 doesn't update or obsolete RFC 6020 (*)
>>>>>      - We should stop this problem from spreading further: updating tooling
>>>>> is one good aspect, we should update the spec. too to at least warn the
>>>>> users.
>>>>>
>>>>> There is no perfect solution.
>>>>> Because of (*), I believe I should accept this errata.
>>>>> Any strong objections? If you have, propose a better plan. And I don't
>>>>> believe that "do nothing" is sufficient.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regarding the "update" solution, see the RFC 7950 writeup at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis/shepherdwriteup/
>>>>>
>>>>>     (16) Will publication of this document change the status of any
>>>>>     existing RFCs? Are those RFCs listed on the title page header, listed
>>>>>     in the abstract, and discussed in the introduction? If the RFCs are not
>>>>>     listed in the Abstract and Introduction, explain why, and point to the
>>>>>     part of the document where the relationship of this document to the
>>>>>     other RFCs is discussed. If this information is not in the document,
>>>>>     explain why the WG considers it unnecessary.
>>>>>
>>>>>        No. YANG 1.0 [RFC6020] is not expected to change its status since
>>>>>        there are data models on the standards-track that conform to YANG
>>>>>        1.0. YANG 1.0 may be considered for retirement once all data models
>>>>>        have naturally been updated to a future version of YANG.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards, Benoit
>>>>>> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6020,
>>>>>> "YANG - A Data Modeling Language for the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --------------------------------------
>>>>>> You may review the report below and at:
>>>>>> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=6020&eid=4911
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --------------------------------------
>>>>>> Type: Technical
>>>>>> Reported by: Ladislav Lhotka <[e-mail]>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Section: 6.1.3
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Original Text
>>>>>> -------------
>>>>>> Within a double-quoted string (enclosed within " "), a backslash
>>>>>> character introduces a special character, which depends on the
>>>>>> character that immediately follows the backslash:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>    \n      new line
>>>>>>    \t      a tab character
>>>>>>    \"      a double quote
>>>>>>    \      a single backslash
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Corrected Text
>>>>>> --------------
>>>>>> Within a double-quoted string (enclosed within " "), a backslash
>>>>>> character introduces a special character, which depends on the
>>>>>> character that immediately follows the backslash:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>    \n      new line
>>>>>>    \t      a tab character
>>>>>>    \"      a double quote
>>>>>>    \      a single backslash
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The backslash MUST NOT be followed by any other character.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Notes
>>>>>> -----
>>>>>> The text doesn't state whether other characters may follow the backslash, and if yes, what it means. Existing implementations have used three approaches:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. report an error if another character follows the backslash
>>>>>> 2. keep only the character following the backslash, i.e., for example, "\x" is the same as "x".
>>>>>> 3. keep both the backslash and the character following it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This ambiguity is undesirable and YANG 1.1 [RFC 7950] explicitly adopted option #1. However, many modules are still being written using YANG version 1.0, so it is important to clarify this issue in RFC 6020 as well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --------------------------------------
>>>>>> RFC6020 (draft-ietf-netmod-yang-13)
>>>>>> --------------------------------------
>>>>>> Title               : YANG - A Data Modeling Language for the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)
>>>>>> Publication Date    : October 2010
>>>>>> Author(s)           : M. Bjorklund, Ed.
>>>>>> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
>>>>>> Source              : NETCONF Data Modeling Language
>>>>>> Area                : Operations and Management
>>>>>> Stream              : IETF
>>>>>> Verifying Party     : IESG
>>>>>> .
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> netmod mailing list
>>>>> [e-mail]
>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>> _______________________________________________
>> netmod mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod