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

Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com> Sun, 22 July 2018 15:38 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 DB48A130DD8 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 08:38:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.909
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.909 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, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] 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 VTSIG8m8yRba for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 08:38:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lj1-x22e.google.com (mail-lj1-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::22e]) (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 A26E5126F72 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 08:38:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lj1-x22e.google.com with SMTP id l15-v6so14829849lji.6 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 08:38:55 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yumaworks-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=bwB4c01VfLbn261XYa827rRUjcRohwA0wvTwSI11N8Q=; b=LtB0gpPTVFBa6S97ON6qyl0GBqxTmayOSQThM//rRMep6vkODf3PmnFUmfn/Mqn8R9 Ln3vO/ceBNHn0GEIdM7RcZ0BCO7PDl+HW8LyYRP24jR3zCKYfxxjo8v7f24QyQZgDuGz mdD5PlGoCNUVAnyIQ8AA3NaGK3CeyXcQhPnxB5/WE9UnREMLssqY1c0a8ic3X47xzf98 U77W8axeqZCWSdIM60M9sB3MBFqnin53oIPTi1tFuPbyRKs+mXaOk9y9bA2MMCJnOjnY B6XaTfX3abCTMmHOdz3+BpBxWnb1PFnYr3tHaM59UfQ13+msNw/tY6kXotrDu1KJTPjm XvpQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=bwB4c01VfLbn261XYa827rRUjcRohwA0wvTwSI11N8Q=; b=cDJr4aCdrADAJn4DKqDO7OTxmoKqjXD9izKZvbP19XgEZElIY4J+yvANQZaOhCGweE PKKU9io2rbO/IFoSandvx3LjCC29lUsPJ6YtfPvt1LLxhV9J8I8BCbCOoaHQ2wH9+TNx /2EiQb5bHOJdIFa5qzZKRpUBXccoROO7G9I5cvvAhRO/+fUgwAX6jI+HsawaRt68Wnfc AcTDafV/ov4fy/K01uuSOpfbWCTpln2ft9cexYbDndXslZV7LelagdnVFW5sjSnX940A g/AWQAY31khxAtqWK7ezoGa41PRCb889jLh0uaBiJ3KUEbeLxhlkDDuShgs6eHFrAaKK 0yzQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlFfaQ8H7+oqKFni4p6Tqg5zdjsmJh/b4EX/6xEJfR4qKeDa//et VnrNDwkztHb4QiGxkClo3maZW3EQfZIr1I1BSC65Sw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpcnKSsmmUqr3qE+lLbB1QWBxhGNX4LQGt6UifE94tKAQO0NxRvKyyxKSJSOgj6VQXvdGX5tZNXbvjnj+vjUhn8=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:97c8:: with SMTP id m8-v6mr7167721ljj.52.1532273933743; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 08:38:53 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 2002:a19:aa46:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 08:38:52 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <02902781-A915-46CE-9EFB-F1DDCD6B1E3C@cisco.com>
References: <98a58631-0c57-7ed8-5277-5dcb3ee9dd86@nokia.com> <0a82c50c-5cec-362d-208e-67d2c136a4bb@cisco.com> <02902781-A915-46CE-9EFB-F1DDCD6B1E3C@cisco.com>
From: Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>
Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2018 08:38:52 -0700
Message-ID: <CABCOCHSpFhKbSNrJS3AfmWzpcyPZ42Hz0YaNVpUvCbB9rdZ7pQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
Cc: Benoit Claise <bclaise=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, Martin Vigoureux <martin.vigoureux@nokia.com>, "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000085078a0571985326"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/sQ_0rWW_s6P8i5e2gFRzm--Pjlc>
Subject: Re: [netmod] "iana" in yang modules' name/namespace/prefix
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: Sun, 22 Jul 2018 15:38:59 -0000

Hi,

A bit ironic...
We should change the name of an acronym that has been in place since 1988
in order to guard against instability.


Andy


On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 7:20 AM, Acee Lindem (acee) <
acee=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>; wrote:

> Hi Benoit, et al,
> I couldn't agree more. The IETF has much more exigent issues with respect
> to YANG models and the attendant protocol infrastructure than whether IANA
> might go away in the future.
> Thanks,
> Acee
>
> On 7/22/18, 9:54 AM, "netmod on behalf of Benoit Claise" <
> netmod-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of bclaise=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>;
> wrote:
>
>     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
>     > netmod@ietf.org
>     > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>     > .
>     >
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     netmod mailing list
>     netmod@ietf.org
>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> netmod@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>