On 10.03.2010 20:34, The IESG wrote:
The IESG has received a request from the NETCONF Data Modeling Language WG (netmod) to consider the following document:- 'YANG - A data modeling language for NETCONF ' <draft-ietf-netmod-yang-11.txt> as a Proposed Standard The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the [email protected] mailing lists by 2010-04-09. Exceptionally, comments may be sent to [email protected] instead. In either case, please retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. ...
Isolated comment on Section 5.3:
5.3. XML Namespaces All YANG definitions are specified within a module that is bound to a particular XML Namespace [XML-NAMES], which is a globally unique URI [RFC3986]. A NETCONF client or server uses the namespace during XML encoding of data. Namespaces for modules published in RFC streams [RFC4844] MUST be assigned by IANA, see Section 14.
I don't see why this is a requirement. The whole point of using URIs as XML namespace identifiers is that you don't *need* a central authority for assignment.
Namespaces for private modules are assigned by the organization owning the module without a central registry. Namespace URIs MUST be chosen so they cannot collide with standard or other enterprise namespaces, for example by using the enterprise or organization name in the namespace.
That's true, but IMHO just repeats best XML practice.
The "namespace" statement is covered in Section 7.1.3.
Best regards, Julian _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
