Hey Kent, Are you behind on your Emails or choosing to ignore the ongoing discussion of the ip-address, ipv4-address, and ipv6-address types? Thanks, Acee
From: netmod <[email protected]> on behalf of Kent Watsen <[email protected]> Date: Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 9:25 PM To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [netmod] WGLC on draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6991-bis-11 This draft has been moved out of the WG. Now in shepherd write-up. Comments: · Section 4 is titled "Internet-Specific Derived Types" o Should it be something like "Internet Protocol Suite Types"? · Many places have "Simplified BSD" o should be "Revised BSD" · The "description" for "email-address" says: o "The canonical format of the domain part of an email-address uses lowercase US-ASCII characters.". § But I don't see a lowercase-restriction in the pattern. § Maybe the description could be clarified? · Note: `pyang --strict -Werror --canonical [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>` o [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>:551: error: keyword "length" not in canonical order (see RFC 6020, Section 12) Kent On Mar 24, 2022, at 1:17 PM, tom petch <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: From: netmod <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> on behalf of Jürgen Schönwälder <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Sent: 22 March 2022 07:11 So we have the following options: a) Leave revision-date to be defined in ietf-yang-revisions. b) Define revision-date in ietf-yang-types. c) Define a date-no-zone type (derived from the date type) which does not have the optional time zone offset. <tp> Yes, I like c) for its simplicity and its adequacy Tom Petch I am leaning towards option c), having a generic type for a date without a time zone is the most general type we can provide. If additional specific revision date semantics are necessary, they can be provided in ietf-yang-revisions. (Looking at the definition of the type revision-identifier in RFC 8525, this is really date-no-zone.) /js On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 08:42:31AM -0700, Andy Bierman wrote: On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 6:01 AM Jürgen Schönwälder < [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 05:21:01PM -0700, Andy Bierman wrote: On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 4:34 PM Kent Watsen <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: All, 1) If you provided WGLC comments on this draft, please review the -12 diff < https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6991-bis-12.txt> to ensure that the updates made are good. 2) Juergen notes below that he also removed the "revision-identifier" typedef, as it is better defined in the YANG versioning module. Any objections? Sorry for the late comment. I think Juergen listed one option as "rename to revision-date and leave it in this module". I support this option. There is no chance that the revision date format will be changing any time soon. This is useful for general applications because revision date is widely used. The ietf-yang-library module (RFC 8525) currently uses its own definition of revision-identifier. While this module could adopt a common definition, the value of such a change is minor. The question where we place the definition of revision-date is likely a matter of which role we expect the versioning work to play in the future. I am relatively neutral on the placement. Not that important I guess. One would think the "date" typedef already in the draft would be useful, but it isn't, and therefore not used. There is no typedef for the pattern YYYY-MM-DD. /js Andy -- Jürgen Schönwälder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103 <https://www.jacobs-university.de/> -- Jürgen Schönwälder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103 <https://www.jacobs-university.de/> _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
