[yang-doctors] [IANA #1173669] questions about IANA-maintained YANG modules

Hi all, 

Thank you all for your feedback. It appears there are different opinions in the comments we've received. Does this need to be discussed further so we can come to a consensus? 

Best regards, 

Sabrina Tanamal
Senior IANA Services Specialist

On Tue Jul 07 12:06:11 2020, rwilton@cisco.com wrote:
> Hi Amanda,
> 
> As a heads up, or possibly a reminder, there is work happening in
> NETMOD regarding versioning YANG modules.
> 
> Two of these documents are likely to have some potential impact on how
> IANA manages YANG Modules (in particular, using a statement to flag
> when non-backwards-compatible changes have occurred, and assigning
> semantic version numbers based on the changes - which will require
> that IANA is able to determine whether a change is backwards
> compatible or not (pyang can help with this)).
> 
> The two drafts in question are (updated versions will be posted
> shortly):
>   https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-verdt-netmod-yang-module-
> versioning-01
>   https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netmod-yang-semver-00
> 
> I have flagged with the authors that we need to add instructions from
> IANA on how to manage YANG documents, and also an early review from
> IANA to check that they are happy with the instructions that we
> propose.  However, the documents are not quite ready for that yet -
> just a heads up.
> 
> With that background, and back to your questions on this thread, I've
> added comments online ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: yang-doctors <yang-doctors-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Acee
> > Lindem (acee)
> > Sent: 07 July 2020 11:22
> > To: Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com>; iana-issues-
> > comment@iana.org
> > Cc: yang-doctors@ietf.org
> > Subject: Re: [yang-doctors] [IANA #1173669] questions about IANA-
> > maintained YANG modules
> >
> > As a co-author of RFC 8294, I would agree.
> > Thanks,
> > Acee
> >
> > On 7/6/20, 10:01 PM, "yang-doctors on behalf of Mahesh Jethanandani"
> > <yang-doctors-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of mjethanandani@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > Hi Amanda,
> >
> >     > On Jul 6, 2020, at 11:41 AM, Amanda Baber via RT <iana-issues-
> > comment@iana.org> wrote:
> >     >
> >     > Dear YANG Doctors,
> >     >
> >     > I'm afraid we have more questions about references in revision
> > comments.
> >     >
> >     > We sometimes make registrations in the Address Family Numbers,
> >     > SAFI
> > Values, and ifType registries for individual requesters, non-IETF
> > standards documents, and I-Ds that haven't been sent to IETF Last
> > Call
> > yet. When we add entries like this to a YANG module, do we need to
> > include
> > a reference in the revision comment?
> [RW]
> Yes, I think that adding the reference to where it has been defined is
> always helpful.
> 
> 
> >
> > I, as a common practice do include a reference in the revision
> > statement. That reference is usually to most important document that
> > describes the module in question.
> >
> >     >
> >     > These are some examples of entries in the "Reference" field for
> > recent registrations:
> >     >
> >     > Nischal Sheth
> >     > draft-kaliraj-idr-bgp-classful-transport-planes-00
> >     > IEEE 1906.1-2015
> >     >
> >     > Another question: we initially missed the requirement to
> >     > include
> > references in revision statements. Can we add missing references to
> > existing revision statements and then add a single blanket revision
> > statement (with no reference) noting that we added the missing
> > references?
> [RW]
> Yes, this would be fine.
> 
> 
> >     >
> >     > If we introduce a typo into an IANA-maintained YANG module, can
> >     > we
> > make the correction without adding a revision statement and changing
> > the
> > date in the filename?
> [RW]
> No, it probably should be marked as a new revision, please see below.
> 
> 
> >
> > In my mind, a module revision statement needs to be bumped if there
> > is
> > a significant change in the module. A typo or adding a missing
> > reference
> > does not rise to the level of a significant change in my mind.
> [RW]
> 
> The current thinking of the versioning authors (no IETF consensus yet)
> is that "any change" to a YANG document must result in a new revision.
> This includes fixing a typo, adding or changing any YANG statements to
> the module, and probably even covers insignificant whitespace changes
> caused by reformatting.
> 
> Regards,
> Rob
> 
> 
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> >     >
> >     > thanks,
> >     > Amanda
> >     >
> >     > _______________________________________________
> >     > yang-doctors mailing list
> >     > yang-doctors@ietf.org
> >     > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yang-doctors
> >
> > Mahesh Jethanandani
> > mjethanandani@gmail.com
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > yang-doctors mailing list
> > yang-doctors@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yang-doctors
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > yang-doctors mailing list
> > yang-doctors@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yang-doctors