Martin,
I'm wonder whether this is really an important optimization, worth
changing now, in the hypothetical case that IANA is not called IANA any
longer in the future?
Right now, "iana" n the YANG module name correctly states what this is about
https://www.iana.org/assignments/yang-parameters/yang-parameters.xhtml
=> "maintained by IANA"
I agree with Jürgen that documenting this in 6087bis is the right way
forward.
Regards, Benoit.
Hello
As part of a recent IESG review (of draft-bfd-yang) a point came up on
the use of "iana" in yang modules' name/namespace/prefix.
This is typically used in the case where the module refers to an IANA
maintained registry. However, the point raised was that the name of
the registry operator might not always be IANA, and that using that
name might not put modules on the most stable deployment footing under
all possible circumstances.
On top of that, as far as I can tell, the use of "iana" is an
undocumented convention.
So, I wanted to collect views:
on whether a convention should be documented,
and, with regards to the point raised in IESG, on whether that keyword
should be changed going forward. In that context, what about "reg"
(for registry) or "regop" (for registry operator)? Other proposals are
welcome.
Thanks
-m
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
.
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
