Re: [netmod] Eric Rescorla's No Objection on draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis-18: (with COMMENT)

Andy Bierman <> Wed, 07 March 2018 21:45 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25B8212D86F for <>; Wed, 7 Mar 2018 13:45:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zPAbvpL8ioYn for <>; Wed, 7 Mar 2018 13:45:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::229]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5373F12D872 for <>; Wed, 7 Mar 2018 13:45:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id v9-v6so5409149lfa.11 for <>; Wed, 07 Mar 2018 13:45:01 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=PF4mFHLPAeOAKwrRKBVsyK3Kfdqma7wfucopo9fw+cY=; b=iZX0JURDc0/Vo5IJCj7nghjwopPYrTkFbHNwFgLIbOKTEUzVzK48e3q5HZ9baP4K5H avK2hdtuA0cRxsfv/5icYmz6Ct3ZEiFxcpsub+SjC15oENU7ttghzVyVALJHZwgjWHVA yZpqkXerJqm92OKYOyH7DLO09FFVt8XaF8NhAk2tAdlRWKK3mf2rivdkrfMQ+XHZkvNH LGfM1bVYrutaK63xg8D3FlSpDMOz65H6LqKJOkmW5dQUMAc/ruV5d6x0+f3uhd867Je5 a5BJOREvKt6ya3z5Pnf3eJVcZKD+akmvRWOlStBlZpIznZeAy5nsOhW+k6gQlwRtF8fp C4gA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=PF4mFHLPAeOAKwrRKBVsyK3Kfdqma7wfucopo9fw+cY=; b=Pi6h1C2a/qI29bwisK7rtMgOWy1x1/xIljwsn2Scf3kKZhshJ6y2JP2UDgZ/PEHsEz EbEiKnkvkVH/rmhX6im60C0E3xgbv6y5Ft2X/M8FN/jUktweTHDIJWzl6MjQXapodhcf SKs2GCYUZR2gY8Ldg6xRFI/Wxo+JIxXQ/h7fkN2Bs9rnx1kFrnt1tqVTdGh/23Ga0OfG oXn9k/Z/z77aXZKRXabO9oVhrAnq1wcwUvRSZ1MN+4+2wBkTvYZcpt501AwzzPWHZ66q faw44fdVBn0dtPRIHi9Xo/K/95eQsnfBxWYTrCji5RWd3Ysht9RnggMtWhnPoaFzT6bf 1g2w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7EMsRDzc9XrnXRp96rxlRQdTfmaj8SIKDA2rdpvwop/YA9E36v+ Gk3t4t5zVQdcZyRRulreG4qd4p1mfCLyvJ3J0zds6Q==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELvZcY9yYHysQkP++hMMpBvPfbDbWFQm1gN0PEVJ5TNOZPOsVYQ6xgI4rW6unUHcfXaytmXyNJRHZneeOyBXs70=
X-Received: by with SMTP id f139mr17475839lfg.75.1520459099589; Wed, 07 Mar 2018 13:44:59 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by with HTTP; Wed, 7 Mar 2018 13:44:58 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <>
From: Andy Bierman <>
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2018 13:44:58 -0800
Message-ID: <>
To: Eric Rescorla <>
Cc: The IESG <>,, NetMod WG Chairs <>, Kent Watsen <>, NetMod WG <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1141207886e6350566d97896"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [netmod] Eric Rescorla's No Objection on draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis-18: (with COMMENT)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETMOD WG list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2018 21:45:06 -0000

On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 11:49 AM, Eric Rescorla <> wrote:

> Eric Rescorla has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis-18: No Objection
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
> introductory paragraph, however.)
> Please refer to
> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis.txt:500
>    normative, if the module itself is considered normative, and not an
>    example module or example YANG fragment.  The use of keywords defined
>    in [RFC2119] apply to YANG description statements in normative
> I think you probably want to rewrite this as:
> "Note that if the module itself is considered normative and not an example
> module or example YANG fragment, then all YANG statements..."

>    o  Prefixes are never allowed for built in data types and YANG
>       keywords.
> I'm not sure I understand what this means. Is the idea that I can't use
> "example-import" somewhere?

The external keyword "example:import" is not the same as the YANG keyword
YANG keywords are not allowed to have prefixes.

>    character MAY be used if the identifier represents a well-known value
>    that uses these characters.
> Is this text saying that only characters in these two subsets are allowed
> and
> therefore, for instance "." is forbidden

This text is suggesting the characters that SHOULD be used.
The dot and dash chars are not included. The text specifies which
characters are included.

>    It is RECOMMENDED that only valid YANG modules be included in
>    documents, whether or not they are published yet.  This allows:
> For clarify, I assume you mean "the modules are published yet"

>    The NETCONF Access Control Model (NACM) [I-D.ietf-netconf-rfc6536bis]
>    does not support parameter access control for RPC operations.  The
>    user is given permission (or not) to invoke the RPC operation with
> This might be slightly clearer if you said "parameter-based access control"