Hi, Most of the document focuses on the administrative details that will be required to update a YANG module. (Lots of them).
My concern is with YANG 1.1 Co-existence and deployment of this new RFC. (Sec 3.1) https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-netmod-yang-module-versioning-09#section-3.1 A client (or another tool) that is compliant with RFC 7950 is not required to be aware of the new YANG extensions, or expect NBC changes in new module revisions. It is not a good idea to allow NBC changes in a YANG 1.1 module. IMO the new rules need to apply to a new YANG language version. It is not reasonable to expect YANG 1.1 tools to work even if MUST requirements are removed. Since YANG 1.1 Co-existence is not possible, vendors will decide for themselves how much NBC they want in their implementations. Breaking a YANG 1.1 client tool is still a problem they will have to deal with. This new RFC could encourage instability and poor engineering practices in YANG APIs. IMO best practice is still to introduce a new identifier and phase out the old identifier with status=deprecated, then obsolete. This is how opensource usually works (for good reason). Andy
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
