Laurent, (and others -- I would say mandatory reading for people
aspiring to work on YANG and SIDs ;) )
Just for context why the -12 version paths in the SID table look
different; with an extra layer hierarchy "voucher" in there.
Version -12 contained a bug that was caused by the transition from the
older yang-data extension (Top-level statement: rc:yang-data
voucher-artifact { ... } ) to the newer way with "sx:structure { ... } ".
The effect of using sx:structure is that it actually creates a container
in the YANG structure, which is called "voucher" in this case. That
means the original block "container voucher { ... }" needed to be
removed to stay wire-compatible with RFC 8366 and RFC 8995; otherwise
the container would be created twice. But this removal wasn't done! For
some time the error was considered as maybe a tool issue rather than a
structural issue.
Later on that error was resolved, and led to the now correct paths
listed in the SID table. So effectively the "sx:structure voucher { ...
}" takes over the exact role of what was "container voucher { ... }" in
older versions. And as a result we keep wire-compatible voucher and
voucher-request data despite the big change in the YANG model structure.
regards
Esko
On 6/18/26 17:15, Laurent Toutain wrote:
Hi Michael,
what is not clear to me is whether a different SID file was announced
earlier. From -12 I found
SID Assigned to
--------- --------------------------------------------------
2451 data /ietf-voucher:voucher/voucher
2452 data /ietf-voucher:voucher/voucher/assertion
2453 data /ietf-voucher:voucher/voucher/created-on
2454 data .../domain-cert-revocation-checks
2455 data /ietf-voucher:voucher/voucher/expires-on
2456 data /ietf-voucher:voucher/voucher/idevid-issuer
2457 data /ietf-voucher:voucher/voucher/last-renewal-date
2458 data /ietf-voucher:voucher/voucher/nonce
2459 data /ietf-voucher:voucher/voucher/pinned-domain-cert
2460 data /ietf-voucher:voucher/voucher/pinned-domain-pubk
2461 data .../pinned-domain-pubk-sha256
2462 data /ietf-voucher:voucher/voucher/serial-number
2463 data .../additional-configuration
2466 data /ietf-voucher:voucher/voucher/est-domain
and from -31,
+------+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| SID | YANG Identifier |
+------+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| 2450 | ietf-voucher (module) |
| 2451 | /ietf-voucher:voucher |
| 2452 | /ietf-voucher:voucher/assertion |
| 2453 | /ietf-voucher:voucher/created-on |
| 2454 | /ietf-voucher:voucher/domain-cert-revocation-checks |
| 2455 | /ietf-voucher:voucher/expires-on |
| 2456 | /ietf-voucher:voucher/idevid-issuer |
| 2457 | /ietf-voucher:voucher/last-renewal-date |
| 2458 | /ietf-voucher:voucher/nonce |
| 2459 | /ietf-voucher:voucher/pinned-domain-cert |
| 2460 | /ietf-voucher:voucher/pinned-domain-pubk |
| 2461 | /ietf-voucher:voucher/pinned-domain-pubk-sha256 |
| 2462 | /ietf-voucher:voucher/serial-number |
| 2463 | /ietf-voucher:voucher/additional-configuration-url |
| 2464 | /ietf-voucher:voucher/est-domain |
| 2465 | /ietf-voucher:voucher/manufacturer-private |
| 2466 | /ietf-voucher:voucher/extensions |
+------+-------------------------------------------------------------+
There is some differences 2451 is now /ietf-voucher:voucher, 2463 was
additional-configuration and becomes additional-configuration-url and
est-domain changed from 2466 to 2464
for the other module
SID Assigned to
--------- --------------------------------------------------
2501 data /ietf-voucher-request:voucher/voucher
2502 data /ietf-voucher-request:voucher/voucher/assertion
2503 data /ietf-voucher-request:voucher/voucher/created-on
2504 data .../domain-cert-revocation-checks
2505 data /ietf-voucher-request:voucher/voucher/expires-on
2506 data .../idevid-issuer
2507 data .../last-renewal-date
2508 data /ietf-voucher-request:voucher/voucher/nonce
2509 data .../pinned-domain-cert
2510 data .../prior-signed-voucher-request
2511 data .../proximity-registrar-cert
2512 data .../proximity-registrar-pubk-sha256
2513 data .../proximity-registrar-pubk
2514 data .../serial-number
2515 data .../agent-provided-proximity-registrar-cert
2516 data .../agent-sign-cert
2517 data .../agent-signed-data
2518 data .../pinned-domain-pubk
2519 data .../pinned-domain-pubk-sha256
becomes
+------+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| SID | YANG Identifier |
+------+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 2500 | ietf-voucher-request (module) |
| 2501 | /ietf-voucher-request:voucher |
| 2502 | /ietf-voucher-request:voucher/assertion |
| 2503 | /ietf-voucher-request:voucher/created-on |
| 2504 | /ietf-voucher-request:voucher/domain-cert-revocation-checks
|
| 2505 | /ietf-voucher-request:voucher/expires-on |
| 2506 | /ietf-voucher-request:voucher/idevid-issuer |
| 2507 | /ietf-voucher-request:voucher/last-renewal-date
|
| 2508 | /ietf-voucher-request:voucher/nonce |
| 2509 | /ietf-voucher-request:voucher/pinned-domain-cert
|
| 2510 | /ietf-voucher-request:voucher/prior-signed-voucher-request
|
| 2511 | /ietf-voucher-request:voucher/proximity-registrar-cert |
| 2512 | /ietf-voucher-request:voucher/proximity-registrar-pubk-sha256
|
| 2513 | /ietf-voucher-request:voucher/proximity-registrar-pubk |
| 2514 | /ietf-voucher-request:voucher/serial-number |
| 2515 |
/ietf-voucher-request:voucher/agent-provided-proximity-registrar-cert |
| 2516 | /ietf-voucher-request:voucher/agent-sign-cert |
| 2517 | /ietf-voucher-request:voucher/agent-signed-data
|
| 2518 | /ietf-voucher-request:voucher/pinned-domain-pubk
|
| 2519 | /ietf-voucher-request:voucher/pinned-domain-pubk-sha256
|
| 2520 | /ietf-voucher-request:voucher/additional-configuration-url
|
| 2521 | /ietf-voucher-request:voucher/est-domain |
| 2522 | /ietf-voucher-request:voucher/extensions |
| 2523 | /ietf-voucher-request:voucher/manufacturer-private
|
It looks pretty much the same except that the voucher level has been
removed.
If the -12 has not been officially published, I've no opposition to
this new allocation.
Laurent
On Thu, Jun 18, 2026 at 1:40 PM Michael Richardson <[email protected]>
wrote:
Laurent Toutain <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'm a little bit confused with the references, the IANA page
has a
> reference for draft 12
Yes, there is an early allocation of the SID range to a previous
version of
the document. The experts are being asked if that's "still
okay", I think.
> 2450 50 ietf-voucher (TEMPORARY - registered 2024-07-15,
publication
> requested 2026-01-31) [draft-ietf-anima-rfc8366bis-12
> <https://www.iana.org/go/draft-ietf-anima-rfc8366bis-12>]
> 2500 50 ietf-voucher-request (TEMPORARY - registered 2024-07-15,
> publication requested 2026-01-31)
[draft-ietf-anima-rfc8366bis-12
> <https://www.iana.org/go/draft-ietf-anima-rfc8366bis-12>]
> and the current version of the draft is 31.
> Laurent
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2026 at 9:16 PM Michael Richardson
<[email protected] <mailto:mcr%[email protected]>>
> wrote:
>>
>> David Dong via RT <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > Hi Michael,
>>
>> > Thank you for the clarifications.
>>
>> > The YANG-SID Ranges were added as RFC 7120 early
allocations (and
>> still
>> > are in the registry there), but the YANG-SID Modules
themselves have
>> > not been:
>>
>> Yes, I don't quite remember when we changed this around,
but I did look at
>> the registry to see that yeah, they were changed to early
allocations.
>> I keep hoping we'll slide in under the 2yr line :-)
>>
>> > Regarding the YANG SID files, we're not familiar with how
to extract
>> > these files and to perform any needed updates on them. Our
>> > understanding and instructions, as per RFC 9595 Section
6.4.3, have
>> > been that the designated experts will provide the files
for us to
>> post.
>>
>> The "normal" kramdown-rfc-extract-sourcecode, etc. should work.
>> I hope the VELOCE process update will make this simpler and
clearer soon.
>>
>> > We're also not sure when to post these SID files; our
understanding
>> > have been that we would post the SID files along with the
YANG
>> Modules
>> > after the document has been published as an RFC, since we
post YANG
>> > Module files after the document has been published as an
RFC, but
>> we've
>> > also asked for clarifications in our Last Call review
sent earlier
>> > today. This is the first time we're having to post SID
files as well.
>>
>> :-)
>> I think that they get posted at the same time as the YANG
module.
>>
>> --
>> Michael Richardson <[email protected]
<mailto:mcr%[email protected]>>, Sandelman Software Works
>> -= IPv6 IoT consulting =- *I*LIKE*TRAINS*
>>
>>
>>
>>
> ----------------------------------------------------
> Alternatives:
> ----------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Anima mailing list [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email [email protected]
--
*IoTconsultancy.nl* | Email/Teams: [email protected] | +31 6
2385 8339_______________________________________________
Anima mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
