Hi Lada,
Please see inline [RW] ...
On 09/12/2015 15:02, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
On 09 Dec 2015, at 15:28, Martin Bjorklund <[email protected]> wrote:
Ladislav Lhotka <[email protected]> wrote:
On 09 Dec 2015, at 12:52, Martin Bjorklund <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi,
It seems we will not reach full agreement on some of the remaining
issues in 6020bis. Re-opening Y26 is one of them. I don't think this
is a good idea, but I realize that the consensus is to relax the "MUST
NOT augment mandatory nodes" rule.
Here is my proposal for new text. Most of this text is copied from
6087bis, so if we add this to 6020bis, 6087bis should probably be
updated as well.
I'd prefer to keep it simple, e.g. as in Rob's proposal:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/JLPDwi9ZqvaOBIw6KjLBGkCSxTU
I don't want to refer to 6087bis here. Note that 6087bis is
Informational. So I basically copied the text from 6087bis.
OK, right. In this case I would simply change "MUST NOT" to "SHOULD NOT".
Your text is rather complicated to understand but
1. added nodes can be made mandatory using a "must" statement, to
the same effect.
Yes, and we won't do anything about that. This isn't handled by Robs
text / the reference in 6087bis.
Sure, I just don't understand why it is so critical to bother with "mandatory
true" if another door for achieving the same is wide open.
I believe your main concern (and mine as well) is that rogue vendors may try to
create silos by augmenting standard modules with mandatory proprietary stuff.
This is a real danger but we can't avoid it anyway.
[RW]
Personally I think that there are two areas of concern. The one that
you have listed above, and also the module upgrade case. E.g. a server
has been upgraded to a new module version but a client is still coded to
an older version. The client should continue to have the same
service/support available as they had previously even though they are
not using the latest module version.
2. there may be other "safe augments", for example via if-feature,
No, if-feature is NOT safe. See Andy's text in 6087bis.
Hmm, section 11 permits a module to be updated with mandatory nodes "if they are
conditionally dependent on a new feature". Why is the augment case different?
[RW]
I would think that augmenting with if-feature can't be safe because it
is only the server that chooses whether a feature is enabled, not the
client.
Thanks,
Rob
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
