Re: [rfc-i] [core] abbreviation SID

Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com> Fri, 17 April 2020 18:50 UTC

Return-Path: <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EEFB3A1722; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 11:50:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.451
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.451 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.248, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" 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 rVB57tdaBBmp; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 11:50:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 00F963A170F; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 11:50:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E83C1F40753; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 11:49:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93DB6F40753 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 11:49:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org
Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=yumaworks-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mjvUAsBqXc8I for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 11:49:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yb1-xb2c.google.com (mail-yb1-xb2c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b2c]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B078BF4074E for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 11:49:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yb1-xb2c.google.com with SMTP id o139so1542895ybc.11 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 11:50:04 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yumaworks-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=HMqCMLXRcrfP0gW7R67uDcMcskNhOewcgXKOBqyu2Dc=; b=X9DLKdv6s3DUkGqcqJAvm1FdsLNcibs2rAxBdZUntCcgeego0B25MTE9nSGabIxyhy EyblQOqOCVmUOs1ZexJx3YtHzhnNze76isaGkgxujzQzGa7xD3/Gl3IybDbKob65RD9s yU4YU9W5QPvClOzKSctOFgQrGdfXddBwJTebQ++5w1U0o0DyvWOk7w/csiFlrsw6Jq7v bU034cOMsSGcqHIJ5prRE0I60Dd41urB72HkNQS2ZnwUwZOLfkLp/U3GyeK/wq0ujkjY 6ffhE4XccscVYZXQUvQ0l4xegACqkOqD7dAhaPpy5aN6BcbeZyQTM5tWp97uX6Sd3aJD R/ug==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=HMqCMLXRcrfP0gW7R67uDcMcskNhOewcgXKOBqyu2Dc=; b=pi7SR89gJGDkkll1uZSMF3ECo/g9MGo+wkK5gcLS+EQxjXmYxHqyhVvCnoasLhKknm q6hhC5bg7Wnn0/OZTmVHl1+ch3ohhETaFeycRzu0SaEOx4sxkTGeplfqHByNfUuvknlk E0Ekn/JzLp3F9Zl8EhQDAN0ESUTNvQvRokWlpJ6QPRIpybtpWkE0xypGi7rkKqHuD2dn /THCiK2cd18PiLzXH2EgYXiduD6EkEWjcrZyv0SKHtflqjV/+2H2y8nz2HkRDBzsjCyQ sx53tGiNnDbTidiae52fm4vdFKYGjZNIrOsC89no3WtBD02NQzYX2Ku9Tecp8y9e7C0Z gAJA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuaAPJ2JQAb8Ooj45A1Xp228VfzP+3//WexAE4u5DwTgCqQkQ/Sb h7Zo0cih+4T3frj+Jt0CfoGrsgRTPq/Yup88SuacEw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypJ1m1ffY0LGg9HlIfINdhk3tuJACUJA0FkrqAfBBIloEur86WBI/1NCZOfXXSf8hppJyIgIsNaMZuU71hp3q2M=
X-Received: by 2002:a25:602:: with SMTP id 2mr323675ybg.359.1587149402458; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 11:50:02 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1UW7eW8VIi.1FNLrngyUqY@pc8xp> <11891.1587078130@localhost> <CABCOCHTu8NVmsENrzrVck+vFF1voeUrgJ7SG798z0Ve0OAwX1g@mail.gmail.com> <1UW7fdFd8A.12CdBil9GXf@pc8xp>
In-Reply-To: <1UW7fdFd8A.12CdBil9GXf@pc8xp>
From: Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2020 11:49:51 -0700
Message-ID: <CABCOCHSjk-f8dh14L-xfeRqY-o8OB+R1qscLOEvsfVxLFvVaaw@mail.gmail.com>
To: tom petch <daedulus@btconnect.com>
Subject: Re: [rfc-i] [core] abbreviation SID
X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." <rfc-interest.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rfc-interest>, <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest>, <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: "rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org" <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>, Core <core@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0711266259098504171=="
Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: "rfc-interest" <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 4:43 AM tom petch <daedulus@btconnect.com> wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Andy Bierman andy@yumaworks.com
> Sent: 17/04/2020 00:25:42
>
> Hi,
>
>
> I do not think three can be much expectation of uniqueness for an acronym
> like SID.
> Also doubt its use in YANG could be confused with Segment Routing. But...
> How about a full name "YANG SID" and OK to use a short name "SID" when the
> context is clear.
>
> <tp>
> Andy,
> The RFC Editor recently expanded POP, in a routing context, to Post Office
> Protocol (which is one of the three options listed) so my view of the scope
> for confusion may be greater than yours!  SID is currently listed as having
> six possibilities, none of which is Schema ID, so I think this needs
> expanding to seven, sooner rather than later (
>


In some of our code SID means Session ID.
I guess it is too generic.
I like YSID (short for YANG Schema Identifier) as a replacement.


Andy


>
> ---
> New Outlook Express and Windows Live Mail replacement - get it here:
> https://www.oeclassic.com/
>
> even if Segment routing has its tanks on the lawn),
> Tom Petch
>
>
> Andy
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 4:02 PM Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
> wrote:
>
>
> tom petch <daedulus@btconnect.com> wrote:
>     > SID already has many meanings of which Segment Routing Identifier is
>     > probably the most widely used.
>
> okay, but this is also a new meaning to our industry with SR.
>
>     > SID is now going to mean Schema IDentifier in the context of YANG and
>     > OAM in general as defined by draft-core-sid which will doubtless be
> on
>     > its way to the RFC Editor before too long.
>
> CORE/YANG/CBOR could change the abreviation used.
> It's in WGLC now, or maybe it's just passed.
>
> * SchemaID.
> * SchemaKey, or SK or SCK
> * CSID, CSI, CSiD
> * YSID, YSI
> * YangID, YID
>
>
> tom petch <daedulus@btconnect.com> wrote:
>     > I believe that an update is needed to the list of well known
> abbreviations,
>
>     > SID already has many meanings of which Segment Routing Identifier is
> probably the most widely used.
>
>     > SID is now going to mean Schema IDentifier in the context of YANG
> and OAM in general as defined by draft-core-sid which will doubtless be on
> its way to the RFC Editor before too long.
>
>     > So I think that the different possibilities for SID need updating
> sooner rather than later.
>
>     > Doubtless this will be a source of confusion for years to come but
> it might be possible to diminish that a little.
>
>     > ---
>     > New Outlook Express and Windows Live Mail replacement - get it here:
>     > https://www.oeclassic.com/
>
>
>     > Tom Petch
>     > _______________________________________________
>     > rfc-interest mailing list
>     > rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
>     > https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest
>
> --
> Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>ca>, Sandelman Software Works
>  -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> core mailing list
> core@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/core
>
_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list
rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest