Re: [Teas] teas-yang-te-types

Tarek Saad <> Wed, 06 May 2020 14:23 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 570DF3A082B; Wed, 6 May 2020 07:23:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GQE_jniuvq1S; Wed, 6 May 2020 07:23:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::f2e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 835C33A07E3; Wed, 6 May 2020 07:23:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id v10so788547qvr.2; Wed, 06 May 2020 07:23:07 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=from:to:cc:subject:thread-topic:thread-index:date:message-id :references:in-reply-to:accept-language:content-language :content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=ieMZAb7VgZud0bdDYRPPbEqa0anowSN5ejlvHGdvZ4I=; b=m/DZtBCt+2Rn9XMo8mV6bwAFC5y2kUrCVxIU/i2fbmnMc79fmZslJDXLZ0fAf1yHsA VpM8/ByampENQtr/Pmqu5Sts2P9kAf013qqHsN1LEAIKCTT48OEBY5fyHgnmiWxFczGa FqbDZdg4g+LNpwQHT7tIj3lTJvHzVpD1b4gav/Fw7oFWOnsVZQjWVQsHlqikKhC6V5Ie hBLFRJHFHZz+NEgJR2oBYUVoEQOfqj+hDvZxLqN26gbK3Xgb+4W5TxX1RPpRqSQMg96H w1FLFz4BfG1HOExTECqiOqYP5JAEM3fQE2rrrC84anfasJl0jJuOMTpqHjV+P/ZiFb87 ag4w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:thread-topic:thread-index :date:message-id:references:in-reply-to:accept-language :content-language:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=ieMZAb7VgZud0bdDYRPPbEqa0anowSN5ejlvHGdvZ4I=; b=JOjdvq4KL2I2TO3gqWCUTYNiOIOeJLyq2wTuUX436IsZmKnMzSGLPLmShqMRxq2vJZ 33MMaWFRl/s0D09zvHLQZKktuv5XdiiagqkZdQBJdf9z+THuaWgX0Q8Gmq1P/+gxS2v4 eEbzLvztxlxra/SSO8n0ObrXnlEzc/wmfzPgEoaKZZOfkAtKYE3EDThqFhM3LMPOZwtq EJE9FXc64j47JASjFcf69SRz8ZDJXQFtPgg6oUoGivDx2Vg9nvo2ZYe9o84E+8MMTDjb LcF+6TTh27zm6tvh+UHLb4P4Aa27xDG7cSdWolpu+kPbGlPtxWutANEfdri2joX5f/LR Z8ow==
X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuZwlEeJrjiSxHiFyUTjTtcNGKE32aMKs8NFm9iRhoRuB1TcDPzC kFfOlCy3e0/lPLVxBQmZYTg=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypKEQU9nytB6Y6/B8sl04nGwuQ5ksgb1Yr16QJdZip6TjK1T7FcZK4/craDHI7ZbAx93sLF/Xg==
X-Received: by 2002:a0c:8b48:: with SMTP id d8mr8454481qvc.195.1588774986462; Wed, 06 May 2020 07:23:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ([2603:1036:304:2892::5]) by with ESMTPSA id x46sm1216184qtb.95.2020. (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 06 May 2020 07:23:05 -0700 (PDT)
From: Tarek Saad <>
To: Lou Berger <>, tom petch <>, TEAS WG Chairs <>
CC: "" <>, "TEAS WG (" <>
Thread-Topic: [Teas] teas-yang-te-types
Thread-Index: AQHWI4VieeV2e48aNUawzgllU1L2sKia0tIAgABJ15M=
X-MS-Exchange-MessageSentRepresentingType: 1
Date: Wed, 6 May 2020 14:23:03 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Exchange-Organization-SCL: -1
X-MS-Exchange-Organization-RecordReviewCfmType: 0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Teas] teas-yang-te-types
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Traffic Engineering Architecture and Signaling working group discussion list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 May 2020 14:23:10 -0000

Hi Tom,

Thanks for reporting this. In fact, this has already been corrected in the version that is in the RFC-Editor queue:


´╗┐On 5/6/20, 5:59 AM, "Teas on behalf of Lou Berger" < on behalf of> wrote:


    Nice catch - and thankfully there's still an opportunity to correct it!

    Given the tooling infrastructure extracts the modules from the document's 
    code sections, I'm not sure anything would actually fail due to this error, 
    but the potential failures are certainly not a good thing - sounds like 
    there's a new idnits feature here.


    Can you send the needed editorial changes  to IANA and the RFC Editor as 
    well as to the list?

    Thank you!


    On May 6, 2020 5:30:55 AM tom petch <> wrote:

    > Lou
    > I am looking at teas-yang-te-types-13 which is in the RFC-Editor queue and 
    > I do not want to believe what I am seeing.
    > The I-D contains two YANG modules and s.1.2 lists the modules and their 
    > prefixes and these module names and prefixes appear in s.4; but when I get 
    > to IANA Considerations, the prefix names are different.  The formatting is 
    > such that the prefix names are well hidden but I cannot make them match the 
    > modules.
    > I can see this causing every TEAS YANG module to fail.
    > Whoops.
    > Tom Petch
    > (who now ducks)

    Teas mailing list