Ladislav Lhotka <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to discuss the issue of developing YANG modules that > mirror IANA registries. The main objection, raised in DNSOP WG in > relation to draft-lhotka-dnsop-iana-class-type-yang-02, was that the > RFC containing the initial revision of the module doesn't get updated > along with the IANA registry (IANA is expected to keep the module in > sync without updating the RFC). As a result implementors can use the > obsolete snapshot from the RFC. > > I am aware of three solution proposals: > > 1. use some kind of template instead of a YANG module > > 2. include only two or three entries of the registry as examples so > that it is clear that it is not the complete list > > 3. keep the module in the document during the whole I-D stage but > instruct the RFC Editor to remove it just before it becomes RFC.
Do you mean that the RFC editor removes it and the RFC just points to the IANA registry? And then the RFC editor hands it over to IANA so that they can use it as an initial version to be published? As long as the instructions to the RFC editor are clear, I think this can work. /martin > > I am personally in favour of #3. According to Randy Presuhn, who > proposed it, this procedure was used during the preparation of BCP > 47. It would require some extra coordination with with IANA but, apart > from that, it should IMO work well and avoid the problem mentioned > above. > > Thanks, Lada > > -- > Ladislav Lhotka > Head, CZ.NIC Labs > PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67 > > _______________________________________________ > netmod mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod > _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
