[netmod] YANG Versioning question - namespace version?

Kent Watsen <kent+ietf@watsen.net> Mon, 17 June 2024 17:02 UTC

Return-Path: <010001902725fef5-d778c086-9139-46a1-bab0-50246decaed8-000000@amazonses.watsen.net>
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 AF390C1E7253 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Jun 2024 10:02:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.907
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.907 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=amazonses.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oRXl_f1MlNRV for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Jun 2024 10:02:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from a48-93.smtp-out.amazonses.com (a48-93.smtp-out.amazonses.com [54.240.48.93]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 236FFC1E7251 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Jun 2024 10:02:00 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/simple; s=ug7nbtf4gccmlpwj322ax3p6ow6yfsug; d=amazonses.com; t=1718643720; h=From:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Mime-Version:Subject:Message-Id:Date:To:Feedback-ID; bh=svdHaDNyQh4ubeeiztN2tCu7Lq5hOckHsa7bjP4B5to=; b=Rec36AX6Aszvr0Bs/vIuHFbWn9hd6xdZBaYsMtr7pHsWOtkG7T8lOvnAy5jBX4K4 FBsVRtq6uEE8zRYq9COeZY/6bALipJHKOptnRjPf4IPk+BOSh492bEm1p51hen5WTiF ocXXPi1IWlGKjdQmYReqvwVXu2rkJVtzDh1G39zc=
From: Kent Watsen <kent+ietf@watsen.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3774.400.31\))
Message-ID: <010001902725fef5-d778c086-9139-46a1-bab0-50246decaed8-000000@email.amazonses.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2024 17:01:59 +0000
To: "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3774.400.31)
Feedback-ID: ::1.us-east-1.DKmIRZFhhsBhtmFMNikgwZUWVrODEw9qVcPhqJEI2DA=:AmazonSES
X-SES-Outgoing: 2024.06.17-54.240.48.93
Message-ID-Hash: DZOV46BSU656DRHZIGHWW2HPSZFVZZPV
X-Message-ID-Hash: DZOV46BSU656DRHZIGHWW2HPSZFVZZPV
X-MailFrom: 010001902725fef5-d778c086-9139-46a1-bab0-50246decaed8-000000@amazonses.watsen.net
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-netmod.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Precedence: list
Subject: [netmod] YANG Versioning question - namespace version?
List-Id: NETMOD WG list <netmod.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/wpNm7FDEyVuv-ovwy41uu946GiY>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netmod>
List-Help: <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:netmod-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:netmod-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:netmod-leave@ietf.org>

NETMOD WG,

I was recently asked why YANG module namespaces aren’t versioned.  For example, the “1.0” at the end of this URI "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-crypto-types:1.0”.  The stated concern was "because without this, then management of backward compatibility becomes a nightmare.”   

This convention was established prior to my becoming active in the IETF, but my guess is that the reason is because the YANG-module update rules in RFC 7950 Section 11 ensure backwards compatibility, and hence the versioning the namespace would have no value.  That said, the YANG Versioning effort introduces the possibility of NBC changes, which makes me wonder if this is something that should be discussed.

Thoughts?

Kent