[netmod] Alvaro Retana's No Objection on draft-ietf-netmod-module-tags-07: (with COMMENT)

Alvaro Retana via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Thu, 11 April 2019 13:30 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: netmod@ietf.org
Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7DF1120048; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 06:30:31 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Alvaro Retana via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-netmod-module-tags@ietf.org, Joel Jaeggli <joelja@gmail.com>, netmod-chairs@ietf.org, netmod@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.95.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <155498943168.25264.4759466648827930694.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2019 06:30:31 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/teR_60PYnVLkt9mNs2n_mYr9uGc>
Subject: [netmod] Alvaro Retana's No Objection on draft-ietf-netmod-module-tags-07: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Thu, 11 Apr 2019 13:30:32 -0000

Alvaro Retana has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-netmod-module-tags-07: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:


(1) Along the same lines of Alissa's DISCUSS, which I support.

§6.1: "For standardized modules new tags MUST be assigned in the IANA registry
defined below, see Section 7.2."  What is a "standardized module"?  It sounds
like a Standards Track document, but (as Alissa pointed out) the registration
policy is only IETF Review.

(2) §7.1: "All YANG module tags SHOULD begin with one of the prefixes in this
registry."  That statement along with the text in §2.4:

   Any tag not starting with the prefix "ietf:", "vendor:" or "user:" is
   reserved for future standardization.  These tag values are not
   invalid, but simply reserved in the context of standardization.

...seem to indicate that a tag with any format can be used.  Is that true?  Is
that the intent?  If so, then it seems to me that vendor/user tags could simply
forgo the standardized prefix.  I guess this is ok...it just makes me wonder
about the need to even define those prefixes.

(3) I'm not sure what, but I think it may be wise to give the would-be DEs for
the new registry in §7.1 some more guidance on the allocation of new prefixes. 
The only current guidance is this: "Prefix entries in this registry should be
short strings consisting of lowercase ASCII alpha-numeric characters and a
final ":" character."