IETF Logo Mail Archive

[netmod] backward compatibility requirements in draft-verdt-netmod-yang-versioning-reqs-00

Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com> Fri, 20 July 2018 21:41 UTC

Return-Path: <andy@yumaworks.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 28266130E30 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Jul 2018 14:41:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 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_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=yumaworks-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 msiCF0DoDztq for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Jul 2018 14:41:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lj1-x231.google.com (mail-lj1-x231.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E32E712F1A5 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Jul 2018 14:41:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lj1-x231.google.com with SMTP id y17-v6so12216533ljy.8 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Jul 2018 14:41:36 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yumaworks-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=wwBZSBOrxx3yv2eTplpZ9QeOBOESCc8RCCw33uQPs9Y=; b=O0EzIn4SRBY1j5eGvPFqR4hIXviw3VgKvNIPJmJn1btJsmplk1GL+TwZy4Wy7vr/0/ VGhgq91c+ciEqZUarP2KCOJyTtM4vnYdBFlY/hm2ZqCrI0fqVyVM/sdXAkd/4Rlw7uF7 C0YRIPG705OoYbST+yyQ+QbUS4CyAyploM9VdeFJyh5EbvmJPu7IFalOQ5ZF1ZMIvXYd k6pBu7ofQfduT4jeAaTr/9lJUyjfOtqB9xdpnXH0b388P0mChgQeogoRPICjm0FRxPZ9 1kMfjp8wHXS3mYBh43ohSlGLx5KDJ0DJbXgzQizu2qeAv9WoaB52Ba30OjesG+pqprZo 7Fvg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=wwBZSBOrxx3yv2eTplpZ9QeOBOESCc8RCCw33uQPs9Y=; b=RDYawyaWMZb43X7MOCKqAZnVw/kPYGK+0oNZgp6zE7Exdo3QvQj0YIMXBGYxza8KRa 2RWxU6fz5SwxGCVtIKM3K1vEHxOh/YV5LpLY4s5sjR5TM9aEMlqeLbBalK8MKupSHYWo HeQuILlGpEyHHpkFnVFfD5UiM1Rw+oQsv456Ho4z0x0utdzWlduIthpKrLtY3aqXhHpl Q5pALnwhhkqVP3ist7sNvPrMkieWFzw3rswPZ9fkTFYgcBI5fyjdFH+EI0Tm33zMlQ6C 7BjPDb3sTH6B2dIjuh66OlceudRI98B6CW85J7aRhv5i2iN/qC/1vJFQMMZiD//NGcNT F9lg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlHBG+8uj7onPgV6ARLmt9QLb5wjS8T6Or5B9YFaT7YzSZBVk6gR bRGNFou/mmdkogoh8FBkdakkJHowUGkzqFOVPK4chBX7S4E=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpfgoi+nzrChQIbODJ23LDcBhaWN54NGkhP+DtndHHwYIUDjWQH8EPZijTIZD4KHd/CysrfmBuWbuTb8V7IKMkQ=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:97c8:: with SMTP id m8-v6mr2907831ljj.52.1532122894606; Fri, 20 Jul 2018 14:41:34 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 2002:a19:aa46:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Fri, 20 Jul 2018 14:41:33 -0700 (PDT)
From: Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2018 14:41:33 -0700
Message-ID: <CABCOCHQ47ztJTPaZMZK7FWHsRPk1jN6SuuAWtg08rmtVgUPEWw@mail.gmail.com>
To: NetMod WG <netmod@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000e2b79e0571752881"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/UTNbIhSCm6EsxmXY9rblnMnysCU>
Subject: [netmod] backward compatibility requirements in draft-verdt-netmod-yang-versioning-reqs-00
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
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, 20 Jul 2018 21:41:39 -0000

Hi,

I strongly object to requirement 3.1:


    3.1  The solution MUST provide a mechanism to allow servers to
            support existing clients in a backward compatible way.



This is not what servers do today at all.
They provide only one version of an implemented module, as specified in RFC
7950.

It is a vendor and operator decision when to upgrade a server such that
non-backward compatible changes are made. They must decide if/when it is ok
based on the client applications in use.

This requirement says you cannot make backward-incompatible changes
which completely contradicts requirements 1.1 and 1.2.

IMO requirement 3.1 should be removed, or change MUST to MAY


Andy

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email