[Yang-sid-logistics] SIDs: YANG documents in process

Sandy Ginoza <sginoza@amsl.com> Thu, 15 August 2024 16:41 UTC

Return-Path: <sginoza@amsl.com>
X-Original-To: yang-sid-logistics@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: yang-sid-logistics@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE38CC14F6A5; Thu, 15 Aug 2024 09:41:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.907
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.907 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5UBi2MmmOmhD; Thu, 15 Aug 2024 09:41:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from c8a.amsl.com (c8a.amsl.com [4.31.198.40]) (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 ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8DC72C14F5F1; Thu, 15 Aug 2024 09:41:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A7F2424B42D; Thu, 15 Aug 2024 09:41:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
Received: from c8a.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (c8a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id x7Nj9QOeZlmM; Thu, 15 Aug 2024 09:41:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (unknown [IPv6:2603:8000:9603:b513:a056:d21e:3581:3437]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 17EB6424B42A; Thu, 15 Aug 2024 09:41:26 -0700 (PDT)
From: Sandy Ginoza <sginoza@amsl.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.120.0.1.13\))
Message-Id: <1195BDDA-9E7E-4438-B177-3F5D866DE157@amsl.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2024 09:39:02 -0700
To: iesg@ietf.org
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.120.0.1.13)
Message-ID-Hash: A7GXHPVFONYRZD5KPCJHCULBMMHDRPIP
X-Message-ID-Hash: A7GXHPVFONYRZD5KPCJHCULBMMHDRPIP
X-MailFrom: sginoza@amsl.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: RFC Editor <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, yang-sid-logistics@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Precedence: list
Subject: [Yang-sid-logistics] SIDs: YANG documents in process
List-Id: "Communication facilitating the logistics of handling YANG SIDs (RFC 9595) in IANA registration and RFC Production Center processes" <yang-sid-logistics.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/yang-sid-logistics/KhgD8HbvmVF6XTH1l_j0QduM12E>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/yang-sid-logistics>
List-Help: <mailto:yang-sid-logistics-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:yang-sid-logistics-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:yang-sid-logistics@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:yang-sid-logistics-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:yang-sid-logistics-leave@ietf.org>

Hi all,

Regarding SIDs, my understanding is that each YANG module will have a corresponding .sid file.  Section 6.5.3 of RFC 9595 [1] indicates that SID values are to be assigned via early assignment (as the documents are being developed) or permanently assigned to already published RFCs.  For our understanding, is there a date by which all YANG modules are expected to have .sid files, and how/where will this be enforced? 

We suggest considering incoming documents and documents already in the RFC Editor queue that do not have SID values as part of the "previously published YANG modules will not have SID allocations” rather than ask authors to update their documents during AUTH48 (for example, draft-ietf-netconf-ssh-client-server-40 [2] entered the RFC Editor queue in March; it has 3 YANG modules and no mention of “SIDs” or “.sid file”).  Are there any concerns with this approach?  

FYI: We currently have 15 active documents that have YANG modules in them, of which one is ready for publication and 9 should be entering AUTH48 in the coming weeks.  There are 8 additional documents with YANG modules in MISSREF.

[1] https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9595.html#section-6.5.3
[2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netconf-ssh-client-server/

Thanks,
Sandy