On 13 Nov 2018, at 14:07, Ladislav Lhotka <[email protected]> wrote: > Paul Wouters <[email protected]> writes: > >> On Mon, 12 Nov 2018, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: >> >>> we would like to ask the working group to adopt the following I-D as a >>> WG item: >>> >>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-lhotka-dnsop-iana-class-type-yang-00 >> >> I'll leave that call up to the chairs bit it sounds like a good idea. >> >> I have reviewed the document. >> >> First, the yand model is correct in the draft. But unfortunately, the >> IANA registry itself has flaws. > > Hmm, I think the module should only reflect the registry contents, so > any problems should be fixed in the registry first.
I don't agree that that ordering is necessary (or desirable). If the YANG type definitions plus change processes are sufficient for a consistent representation of the registries concerned in YANG, and if the YANG continues to track the registry as I understand is intended, then fixes to the registry can happen at any time after the goals of this document have been achieved. If accuracy of the registries is a prerequisite for progress on this document, we may as well pour concrete over it. Better to treat registry quality and the representation of the registry in YANG as orthogonal, I think. Joe _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
