> -----Original Message----- > From: Alex Campbell [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2016 8:54 PM > To: Ing-Wher (Helen) Chen <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [netmod] update on "rdns" URN for enterprise YANG models > > > > From: netmod <[email protected]> on behalf of Ing-Wher (Helen) > > Chen <[email protected]> > > Sent: Thursday, 21 April 2016 2:40 a.m. > > To: Juergen Schoenwaelder > > Cc: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [netmod] update on "rdns" URN for enterprise YANG models > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:j.schoenwaelder@jacobs- > > > university.de] > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 2:23 PM > > > To: Ing-Wher (Helen) Chen <[email protected]> > > > Cc: [email protected] > > > Subject: Re: [netmod] update on "rdns" URN for enterprise YANG > > > models > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 04:23:51PM +0000, Ing-Wher (Helen) Chen > wrote: > > > > I'm not an expert on XML namespaces and I'm a little confused by > > > > some of the questions, so I apologize if my response below does > > > > not quite answer the questions. I'd like to point out that the > > > > request for "rdns" URN is not to prevent the use of URLs. The request > for "rdns" > > > > URN is to allow an enterprise to easily create a URN namespace, if > > > > the enterprise happens to prefer to use URN as a YANG module > > > > namespace. I also think that the problems that arise when a YANG > > > > module uses a URN based on an enterprise's domain name are the > > > > same problems that arise when a YANG module uses a URL based on an > enterprise's domain name. > > > > (Of course, this is not an excuse to fix the problems that should > > > > be > > > > fixed.) > > > > > > You write "happen to prefer to use URN" - why? > > > draft-chen-rdns-urn Section 4 > > <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-chen-rdns-urn-06#section-4> > > discusses why an enterprise might prefer to use URN over URL. URL > > provides resource access mechanism, which might mislead a customer to > > request that the YANG module be accessible at a specific location. > > It's true that the device does not care that the YANG module is not at > > a particular URL, but I can still imagine getting a bug requesting that the > YANG module be accessible at the URL. > > URLs are frequently used as namespaces in XML, without referring to a > particular resource (and most of them are HTTP URLs that return generic > error-404 pages). > Does this proposal suggest that YANG namespaces should be treated > differently from XML namespaces?
No. (Just because a URL is used as an XML Namespace doesn't mean that the URL should be treated differently from how it's defined in <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986> . This seems like a reasonable preference to me.) Thanks, Helen _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
