IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [yang-doctors] [Anima] Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-anima-brski-async-enroll-03

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Wed, 18 August 2021 11:26 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
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 883FB3A14C6; Wed, 18 Aug 2021 04:26:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 w-M3QZHRI7df; Wed, 18 Aug 2021 04:26:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C579F3A14CB; Wed, 18 Aug 2021 04:26:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDEC1389B5; Wed, 18 Aug 2021 07:31:55 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id PSp5RdXilQC8; Wed, 18 Aug 2021 07:31:51 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.21]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E126389B3; Wed, 18 Aug 2021 07:31:51 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 833019C6; Wed, 18 Aug 2021 07:26:44 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: "Fries\, Steffen" <steffen.fries@siemens.com>, Reshad Rahman <reshad@yahoo.com>, "yang-doctors\@ietf.org" <yang-doctors@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-anima-brski-async-enroll.all\@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-anima-brski-async-enroll.all@ietf.org>, "anima\@ietf.org" <anima@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <ed4b0aca6c8743529875c5af956b4d63@siemens.com>
References: <162904097601.26892.13230706221222180793@ietfa.amsl.com> <ed4b0aca6c8743529875c5af956b4d63@siemens.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 26.1
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
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2021 07:26:44 -0400
Message-ID: <20228.1629286004@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/yang-doctors/_ttMRWGph0iL5IYLsgIp_Dyj9Ss>
Subject: Re: [yang-doctors] [Anima] Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-anima-brski-async-enroll-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: Wed, 18 Aug 2021 11:26:59 -0000

    reshad> Other comments: - rc:yang-data (RFC8040) is used. While this
    reshad> seems to be fine, if the voucher- request-async-artifact template
    reshad> needs to be extended in the future, my understanding is that it
    reshad> is not possible with yang-data. However, you could use
    reshad> "structure" and (eventually) "augment-structure" from RFC8791 for
    reshad> this.

I am probably the guilty party that wrote the YANG.
I guess I missed your email (seeing Steffen's reply only), and I'll go back
to the list to find it to understand.

We do want to mix and match the various extensions.
It is not clear to me how to do that.

    > We will discuss this point. Currently there is no explicit need for
    > enhancements.

    reshad> - Prefix "ivr" is used for ietf-voucher-request although RFC8995 has
    reshad> "vcr". While this is valid, I am curious why.

I didn't think the prefix had relevance outside of the module, but I don't
know a lot here.

--
]               Never tell me the odds!                 | ipv6 mesh networks [
]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works        |    IoT architect   [
]     mcr@sandelman.ca  http://www.sandelman.ca/        |   ruby on rails    [

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email