Re: [rfc-i] abbreviation SID

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Thu, 16 April 2020 23:02 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 5E9A33A12DB; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 16:02:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.652
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.652 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.248, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 Mmda03VWuO6h; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 16:02:19 -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 416183A12E4; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 16:02:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF2FCF4071D; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 16:01:57 -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 6BBB3F4071D for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 16:01:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org
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 0BmvhK0V_8jw for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 16:01:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 38AF1F4071C for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 16:01:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DB0B38980; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 19:00:27 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B4731DA; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 19:02:10 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: "tom petch" <daedulus@btconnect.com>, core@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <1UW7eW8VIi.1FNLrngyUqY@pc8xp>
References: <1UW7eW8VIi.1FNLrngyUqY@pc8xp>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 25.1.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2020 19:02:10 -0400
Message-ID: <11891.1587078130@localhost>
Subject: Re: [rfc-i] 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
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3644644839597189490=="
Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: "rfc-interest" <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

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 =-



_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list
rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest