Re: [netmod] status terms in YANG and IANA registries

Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz> Mon, 22 July 2019 18:49 UTC

Return-Path: <lhotka@nic.cz>
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 6D97012012A for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 11:49:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=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 I_WKp9UebRbx for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 11:49:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from trail.lhotka.name (trail.lhotka.name [77.48.224.143]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6782E120131 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 11:49:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by trail.lhotka.name (Postfix, from userid 109) id 0C7B8182048A; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 20:47:52 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from localhost (dhcp-8bbc.meeting.ietf.org [31.133.139.188]) by trail.lhotka.name (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A6694182004A for <netmod@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 20:47:50 +0200 (CEST)
From: Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz>
To: netmod@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <871s6wt1qw.fsf@nic.cz>
References: <871s6wt1qw.fsf@nic.cz>
Mail-Followup-To: netmod@ietf.org
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 14:49:18 -0400
Message-ID: <87pnm13nwx.fsf@nic.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/LoaaHRtYkVsx8AzVW40FfCiDWSg>
Subject: Re: [netmod] status terms in YANG and IANA registries
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, 22 Jul 2019 18:49:26 -0000

Hi,

I haven't received any responses to my message below but, given 
the recent discussion in DNSOP and IETF mailing list, I believe it 
is important to address this discrepancy in order not to give 
ammunition to those who oppose mirroring IANA registries in YANG 
modules.

Lada

Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz> writes:

> Hi, 
> 
> sec. 7.21.2 of RFC 7950 defines the "deprecated" and "obsolete" 
> statuses as follows: 
> 
>    o  "deprecated" indicates an obsolete definition, but it 
>    permits 
>       new/continued implementation in order to foster 
>       interoperability with older/existing implementations. 
> 
>    o  "obsolete" means that the definition is obsolete and 
>    SHOULD NOT be 
>       implemented and/or can be removed from implementations. 
> 
> Then, RFC 7224 contains these instructions in the IANA 
> Considerations section: 
> 
>       "status": Include only if a registration has been 
>       deprecated (use 
>                 the value "deprecated") or obsoleted (use the 
>                 value "obsolete"). 
> 
> However, RFC 8126 defines the meaning of the status terms in 
> IANA registries (sec. 9.6) in the following way: 
> 
>    Specific entries in a registry can be marked as "obsolete" 
>    (no longer in use) or "deprecated" (use is not recommended). 
> 
> I would say that "deprecated" means something else here than in 
> YANG. For example, the RSA/MD5 algorithm in [1] is marked as 
> "deprecated" because it was found weak, and implementing it to 
> "foster interoperability" can hardly be recommended. Instead, 
> "SHOULD NOT implement" applies here, too. 
> 
> I think it would be good to either align the semantics of 
> "deprecated" in YANG with IANA registries, or at least map both 
> IANA terms to "obsolete" in YANG. 
> 
> Lada 
> 
> [1] 
> https://www.iana.org/assignments/dns-sec-alg-numbers/dns-sec-alg-numbers.xhtml 
> 
> --  Ladislav Lhotka Head, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: 
> 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67 
> 
> _______________________________________________ netmod mailing 
> list netmod@ietf.org 
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod 

-- 
Ladislav Lhotka Head, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67