Re: [yang-doctors] New procedure for errata affecting YANG modules

Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com> Wed, 21 March 2018 08:40 UTC

Return-Path: <bclaise@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: yang-doctors@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: yang-doctors@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A98412D86F for <yang-doctors@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Mar 2018 01:40:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.509
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.509 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 h7wEMtGVTvRm for <yang-doctors@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Mar 2018 01:40:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aer-iport-1.cisco.com (aer-iport-1.cisco.com [173.38.203.51]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 51A1A120724 for <yang-doctors@ietf.org>; Wed, 21 Mar 2018 01:40:44 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=5907; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1521621644; x=1522831244; h=subject:from:to:references:cc:message-id:date: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=sZRyf6SsOalwnhGNb/6Fg3+AHyIf75BN/ieOTsYrsoU=; b=BNp+Jxz5S178iqsjF0c9NfPeKcQEfqyfLsLVANSQsqWmAhyorzfgUS7n A4TH1c8URYFfEBSf//auYFhNZcE7oGWSoG0J6S6D6iEMwx7PvXnKgB473 dN/J1Njy87AeP+CRy+q/NBdHOr9D+vMfI2BlPqzDuXffcnENjRg9qVfG0 g=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0ANAgBcGbJa/xbLJq1DGhoBAQEBAQIBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEBCAEBAQGENXIog12KfY5mgT+OdIUPFIF6CyWEbAKDcjYWAQIBAQEBAQECayi?= =?us-ascii?q?FJgYjVhAJAkICAlcGDQYCAQGFCg8wjj2bPYIlJoQ6g3CCDoUvg2eBUCUMgmeDH?= =?us-ascii?q?AICAQEXgQ+DOYJUA5g7CYYPiSQHgU5Ahg6FGodDgXGBTYU2gSYjBisSgUAzGgg?= =?us-ascii?q?bFTqCQwmQSEAwAY03LIIZAQEB?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.48,339,1517875200"; d="scan'208,217";a="2742376"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-4.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 21 Mar 2018 08:40:42 +0000
Received: from [10.61.165.176] ([10.61.165.176]) by aer-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w2L8egjE010650; Wed, 21 Mar 2018 08:40:42 GMT
From: Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>
To: YANG Doctors <yang-doctors@ietf.org>
References: <a7e6176f-bb53-9336-ec52-04b910d80a15@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <8c2b182d-17b2-f91f-5864-72780777a4bf@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2018 08:40:42 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <a7e6176f-bb53-9336-ec52-04b910d80a15@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------51277CDB07EBC8D5D50486A6"
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/yang-doctors/GKRoS-sfXRzFLOt4SfjqqxeOXZg>
Subject: Re: [yang-doctors] New procedure for errata affecting YANG modules
X-BeenThere: yang-doctors@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Email list of the yang-doctors directorate <yang-doctors.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/yang-doctors>, <mailto:yang-doctors-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/yang-doctors/>
List-Post: <mailto:yang-doctors@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:yang-doctors-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yang-doctors>, <mailto:yang-doctors-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2018 08:40:46 -0000

Copying Ignas, as I'm not sure he is on the YANG doctor list yet.
Ignas, the AI will be on you to try this process for RFC6470.

Regards, B.
> Dear all,
>
> As discussed during our YANG doctor meeting today.
>
> The issue: RFC 6470 errata 
> <https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=6470> that impacts a 
> YANG module
>
> Here is the proposed procedure, to be agreed with/by the YANG doctors.
>
> 1. YANG doctors/AD evaluate the errata
> 2. If the errata is valid, the errata is accepted
> 3. Two cases from here
>   case 1: the errata is editorial
>                => ask IANA to update the YANG module in the registry
>                => we keep the same revision data
>   case 2: the errata impacts the toolchain
>                => need a new revision and, as a consequence a new RFC
> 4. For case 2: Check the YANG impact analysis
>         Is there a cascading effect?
>         Do the depending YANG modules validate?
>         Should the authors of the dependent YANG modules be warned
>         Typical cases: import by revision, the leafs are used/not used 
> in the dependent YANG module
>         for ex: 
> https://www.yangcatalog.org/yang-search/impact_analysis.php?modules[]=ietf-netconf-notifications@2011-12-09.yang&recurse=0&rfcs=1&show_subm=1&show_dir=both
>             => we see that 
> draft-wu-netconf-base-notification-nmda-00.txt 
> <http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-wu-netconf-base-notification-nmda> 
> ietf-netconf-notifications-nmda@2018-02-01.yang YANG module does not 
> validate
> 5. For case 2:
>     We use an expedite process for the new RFC, to publish the RFC 
> with only the errata applied
>     The new RFC obsoletes the old one
>
> Note1: this process should not be a backdoor to publish new things
> Note2: the expedite processing should be validated by the IESG, on a 
> case by case basis
> Note3: the YANG module update (case 1) should be validated by IANA 
> (Michelle Cotton), on a case by case basis.
> Note3: if the case 2 takes more than a month, we need a different process
>
> Regards, Benoit