Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6021-bis-00.txt

[Ladislav Lhotka <[e-mail]>]

On Mar 24, 2013, at 10:21 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder <[e-mail]> wrote:

> On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 02:00:19PM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>> 
>> OK, but I wonder - do we have any strategy for correcting mistakes
>> in our modules? They will be typically revealed only after a module
>> is put under stress and used in advanced data models. If breaking
>> compatibility is a no go, then we are pretty much stuck.
> 
> YANG has specific rules how to make changes. This is what we follow.
> In this particular case, I do not at all agree with you that there
> is a mistake to correct.

My question had nothing to do with the particular problem of IP addresses and zones, though I'd argue that ipv4-address-no-zone is at least ugly and sounds to me like beef-no-horse.

YANG change rules require strict backward compatibility. I am afraid it is counterproductive at this stage because our initial YANG modules generally get published before they have been thouroughly tested. It would be quite daring to think that our work is flawless, despite all the effort we put in it. What if we publish the routing module and then get feedback from protocol implementors or I2RS, indicating that something should be changed, and this something breaks compatibility?

I believe errors should be corrected and significant improvements implemented, and the sooner the better. It will be much harder after a module becomes widely used.

Lada

> 
> /js
> 
> -- 
> Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
> Phone: [phone]         Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany
> Fax:   [phone]         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>

--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C