Re: [netmod] "iana" in yang modules' name/namespace/prefix

[Benoit Claise <[e-mail]>]

Martin,

I'm wonder whether this is really an important optimization, worth 
changing now, in the hypothetical case that IANA is not called IANA any 
longer in the future?
Right now, "iana" n the YANG module name correctly states what this is about
https://www.iana.org/assignments/yang-parameters/yang-parameters.xhtml
     => "maintained by IANA"
I agree with Jürgen that documenting this in 6087bis is the right way 
forward.

Regards, Benoit.
> Hello
>
> As part of a recent IESG review (of draft-bfd-yang) a point came up on 
> the use of "iana" in yang modules' name/namespace/prefix.
> This is typically used in the case where the module refers to an IANA 
> maintained registry. However, the point raised was that the name of 
> the registry operator might not always be IANA, and that using that 
> name might not put modules on the most stable deployment footing under 
> all possible circumstances.
>
> On top of that, as far as I can tell, the use of "iana" is an 
> undocumented convention.
>
> So, I wanted to collect views:
> on whether a convention should be documented,
> and, with regards to the point raised in IESG, on whether that keyword 
> should be changed going forward. In that context, what about "reg" 
> (for registry) or "regop" (for registry operator)? Other proposals are 
> welcome.
>
> Thanks
> -m
>
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
> .
>