IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Tools-discuss] Re: documents by WG --- RFCs and related documents -- are there APIs

Tom Pusateri <pusateri@bangj.com> Wed, 30 July 2025 18:18 UTC

Return-Path: <pusateri@bangj.com>
X-Original-To: tools-discuss@mail2.ietf.org
Delivered-To: tools-discuss@mail2.ietf.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23F994D76240 for <tools-discuss@mail2.ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Jul 2025 11:18:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ietf.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 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, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: mail2.ietf.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=bangj.com
Received: from mail2.ietf.org ([166.84.6.31]) by localhost (mail2.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id g65-H20nDZuh for <tools-discuss@mail2.ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Jul 2025 11:18:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from oj.bangj.com (69-77-154-174.static.skybest.com [69.77.154.174]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BA5884D76238 for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Jul 2025 11:18:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (69-77-155-156.static.skybest.com [69.77.155.156]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by oj.bangj.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5F01810EA4; Wed, 30 Jul 2025 14:18:48 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=bangj.com; s=201907; t=1753899528; bh=xH3sQs6yVk2t1ykqGDH9GB3HApa4GzfKa9V/ZiMapGo=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To:From; b=rdrt82IB55DMb7X9X/vRggZGqJo8x/KPvtzWZHBAl2amCbCo1LWVx/R66uLpOLt2h B5bW/v+PJKhZd8MhAnF5xTa6T4tMB52R3uhW2MIrHTQDIIuQgGjoIr8Vhs0rSP2vsm Xb8ZgQABbO3GW/orBJmm/g+qOUaXPgxmTgt3D3mxQmGmbFR4WhDPv+O+CYwAQVB7nD F8sUJT9u1gMAilRmCIcfV6akUoWfABIUeOtAll29IHGQowID16k3eHBxt+A6NSoMRK qQugOvSWgz4vkNkiD/d7OzsU8Mf2M6pabHsTi9uQ10sdN3EmR5Zm+KM0GimeowpGqo BknssXTmE/YPA==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3826.600.51.1.1\))
From: Tom Pusateri <pusateri@bangj.com>
In-Reply-To: <17410.1753897913@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2025 14:18:37 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <04C1C600-105E-4D91-9049-F343050AF536@bangj.com>
References: <523a3640-feab-4eeb-9b98-09eb6438923c@staff.ietf.org> <9215E610-26BC-4110-A319-66C85E7C2A4F@bangj.com> <17410.1753897913@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
To: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3826.600.51.1.1)
Message-ID-Hash: DJI3ROEZLOA6YXAUFCOKQ7RTHOJT3Z3T
X-Message-ID-Hash: DJI3ROEZLOA6YXAUFCOKQ7RTHOJT3Z3T
X-MailFrom: pusateri@bangj.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-tools-discuss.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: tools-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [Tools-discuss] Re: documents by WG --- RFCs and related documents -- are there APIs
List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion <tools-discuss.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/R6sypvDB_mpIOW_IzEtVW83TAa8>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tools-discuss>
List-Help: <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:tools-discuss-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:tools-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:tools-discuss-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:tools-discuss-leave@ietf.org>

Well, that’s the whole point of a versioned API. When you make model changes, you do so in a way that preserves the old API too. And while you offer a new (v2) API, you never break the old API.

It’s just a choice when adding new features. You can choose to break the old API or you can choose to preserve it.

Tom

> On Jul 30, 2025, at 1:51 PM, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> wrote:
> 
> 
> Tom Pusateri <pusateri@bangj.com> wrote:
>> Hopefully, the v1 API won’t change. Isn’t that the point of versioning?
>> If the models were to change, then you should define a new v2 API so
>> that you don’t break all the existing v1 users.
> 
> It could prove impossible to maintain due to information model
> changes, so return "404"...
> 
> 
> --
> Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
>           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
> 
> 
> 
>

v2.39.1 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status