Re: [yang-doctors] Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-babel-yang-model-03

Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com> Tue, 15 October 2019 22:44 UTC

Return-Path: <mjethanandani@gmail.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 5AC7C120045; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 15:44:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 03hoJmeWWVmq; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 15:43:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pg1-x52b.google.com (mail-pg1-x52b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::52b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5B76D12003E; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 15:43:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pg1-x52b.google.com with SMTP id i32so13008530pgl.10; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 15:43:58 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=tmyA8edMn+QE9LbD6qynKGAo1oyWrdKxQLSjiK5ft7Y=; b=KeYSdXrJ5+vKzhCt/XCkY5x594JkS2TcPRONmb6eAPfALmDobYwB8Ytv9N08a1A2Xm dtHswu/mqe8uhVdUh53lkEdDThIPYNgw43i2Xw54tezy5BpZ3uYAsOWcclcFC3hWIcdw /4BGNkw+mTEDKSdD7J7MERZ9mDHaDTomJbVNP7QfXEbPRoG6pBTZWO4+KnCl/4iYfDTk jg/BVrQbeCGN6toSj54QDLs1wPRbHm0oXQ5yFtpn/R4d/ht0Dz19Ja1mWPxpJ0T9KFla 2foCPi12vJ0dJGHYwyuoDMcLcIu3YraBQj6r/iuBfjU/SDjCucTLkgRc5PDHKPDJKVVw X7pw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=tmyA8edMn+QE9LbD6qynKGAo1oyWrdKxQLSjiK5ft7Y=; b=U4oRLfCSVwB1Ww8xb24ByfEvA3LPxxWqj/5N7cbF89WFeh8FP7Xk3cikGwdnymTmcP v2gvYeSVgewgzr3KcLuI/95A5gJEbuO9DjkvCUZ7T2NRLCQHLnz80pnDLLpJjzyEJKCS OXZbab5Jn8IKMGjmiEiO5iDY0aVcJPxv6xBhprWZuTW14+ohzSHYikoqNzz/K82BGCd8 gacVsdom+PmpbqBetrrATdplaVTlX0QZujgDAbcX8MarYNBJBGs1iDU+otlS05TN8msb JriNkMhIeLVcpRaPwdWSZg/rKhTzSa+fpv644/LCHSCtRMuq4GuOlrMe3IBuvXX5Nu51 7jiA==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWh73ggq7nktm4L0MGFPZeZwAg1fxwpqUe8huqgKfTTAKP5RcVF 0faPnf04+Mc5cE3WCEbVPM0=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxrS+mBANX4B+0SPbpBNLlkbWdBYSWzLrJtUuIDljYcSa64pz2l51Vt2DbI3eaOnYYCzZgHjA==
X-Received: by 2002:a63:c509:: with SMTP id f9mr41095636pgd.79.1571179437629; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 15:43:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.1.244.27] ([66.170.99.95]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 127sm29400726pfw.6.2019.10.15.15.43.56 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 15 Oct 2019 15:43:56 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20191015.083816.593214766346959138.mbj@tail-f.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 15:43:56 -0700
Cc: =?utf-8?B?UmFkZWsgS3JlasSNw60=?= <rkrejci@cesnet.cz>, noreply@ietf.org, YANG Doctors <yang-doctors@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-babel-yang-model.all@ietf.org, babel@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <2B44BED5-B613-4E7D-A7A5-DCD01D0D986C@gmail.com>
References: <157106166738.24700.11185508261809138396@ietfa.amsl.com> <20191014.160642.807920684918683059.mbj@tail-f.com> <7C7FF9F2-1B87-46EB-A55D-FCA0C4E3CFD4@gmail.com> <20191015.083816.593214766346959138.mbj@tail-f.com>
To: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/yang-doctors/MVPgAYh1KUWtNGxwiRI0SMtaaWk>
Subject: Re: [yang-doctors] Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-babel-yang-model-03
X-BeenThere: yang-doctors@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 22:44:01 -0000

Hi Martin,

> On Oct 14, 2019, at 11:38 PM, Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>; wrote:
> 
> Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com>; wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On Oct 14, 2019, at 7:06 AM, Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>; wrote:
>>> 
>>> Radek Krejčí via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>; wrote:
>>>> Reviewer: Radek Krejčí
>>>> Review result: Ready with Nits
>>>> 
>>>> There is a single module in the draft: ietf-babel@2019-08-22.yang.
>>>> 
>>>> There are 2 warnings reported by pyang 2.0.2, but both warnings seem
>>>> to be
>>>> false.
>>> 
>>> Actually, I think they are correct.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> ietf-babel@2019-08-22.yang:53: warning: RFC 8407: 3.1: The IETF Trust
>>>> Copyright
>>>> statement seems to be missing (see pyang --ietf-help for details).
>>> 
>>> Ok it isn't missing, but it doesn't use the eaxct words it should
>>> use.
>> 
>> Yes, the words are not exact. I see two versions of the copyright
>> statement. Do not know which one is the correct one.
>> 
>> In the model and output of ‘pyang —ietf-help’
>> 
>>     Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as
>>     the document authors.  All rights reserved.
>> 
>>     Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or
>>     without modification, is permitted pursuant to, and subject
>>     to the license terms contained in, the Simplified BSD
>>     License set forth in Section 4.c of the IETF Trust's Legal
>>     Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
>>     (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
> 
> pyang only checks the text in the YANG model.
> 
> But the text in the the model and the pyang --ietf-help are not the
> same (they are similar but not the same).
> 
> The text that pyang enforces is the text found in the template in
> Appendix B in RFC 8407 (it allows (and recommends) a link to the RFC
> which is not present in the 8407 template).
> 
> The template text in 8407 is taken from paragraph 6.d in
> https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info/IETF-TLP-5.htm.

Ok. I literary had to copy the text from the output of —ietf-help to make it happy.

> 
> 
>> In the draft:
>> 
>>   Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
>>   document authors.  All rights reserved.
>> 
>>   This document is subject to BCP 78 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/bcp78>
>>   and the IETF Trust's Legal
>>   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
>>   (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info
>>   <https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info>) in effect on the date of
>>   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
>>   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
>>   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
>>   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
>>   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
>>   described in the Simplified BSD License.
>> 
>>> 
>>>> ietf-babel@2019-08-22.yang:208: warning: the module seems to use RFC
>>>> 2119
>>>> keywords, but the required text from RFC 8174 is not found (see pyang
>>>> --ietf-help for details).
>>> 
>>> This one seems legit as well.
>> 
>> Yes, it is missing the word “NOT RECOMMENDED”. I will add it.
> 
> Note that pyang just checks the module, not the draft.  It asks you to
> include the 8174 text in the module's description.  It is included in
> all "recently" published modules (that use 8174 language).  See
> e.g. RFC 8366.

Ok. I have added the text in the module also.

Cheers.

> 
> This recommendation is not included in RFC 8407, and I don't remember
> the exact origin (perhaps Kent?), but it came out of the discussions
> with the RFC editor.
> 
> 
> 
> /martin

Mahesh Jethanandani
mjethanandani@gmail.com