[As a contributor, looking at Per's original message] Hi Per,
> The YANG Versioning Design Team has come to the > conclusion to not introduce another delimiter (the > number sign, "#") for the YANG Semver versioning > scheme in the YANG module filename convention, > but instead reuse the existing delimiter (at sign, "@"). Oh well, I kind of liked # > Strings from either versioning convention will never > match so it will trivial for tooling to infer version > convention used, for humans it is easy to visually > identify either versioning scheme as well. Easy, but not easier, for humans. The '#' stood out. > The motivation is to simplify operations and to not > introduce unnecessary turbulence for tools. Could you share more about how this simplifies operations and reduces tool turbulence? > This also better aligns with points made in LC reviews > from directorates and IANA. Searching the list archive, I see a message from Meir Goldman on March 2nd regarding '#' being a URI fragment delimiter. I suppose it is a valid concern, e.g., for HTTP-based file retrieval, or in RESTCONF, if a module's sem-ver name is used as a YANG list key (not the case in YANG Library, RFC 8525). But was there a test with IANA's web server, or any web server? Where does this concern arise in practice, or expected to arise? Is it server-side or client-side concern? Were there any other LC reviews from directorates and IANA related to this issue? PS: looking at the -05 to -10 diff, I see that the "Known Incompatibilities" section was moved to Appendix A. This is better, but I wonder if better still would be to remove it entirely, or mark it as to be removed by the Editor before publication. Does the information have long-term value? BTW, "Known Incompatibilities" is a misnomer, as the section doesn't actually identify any incompatibilities. Kent > On Apr 27, 2026, at 6:31 PM, Lou Berger <[email protected]> wrote: > > All, > > We'd like to run a limited WG LC on > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-yang-module-filename/ > > This LC has been requested by our AD (and we agree!) due to the significant > technical changes in the document. While the actual diff is small, see [1], > the changes have notable implementation implications. Please limit your > comments to the changes since the previous LC (version -05). > > This last call ends May 5. > > Thank you, > > Kent and Lou > > [1] > https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url1=draft-ietf-netmod-yang-module-filename-05&url2=draft-ietf-netmod-yang-module-filename-10&difftype=--html > > -------- Forwarded Message -------- > Subject: Comment added to draft-ietf-netmod-yang-module-filename history > Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2026 08:33:39 -0700 > From: IETF Secretariat <[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>, [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>, [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>, [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> > > > Please DO NOT reply to this email. > > Mahesh Jethanandani added the following comment to the history of > draft-ietf-netmod-yang-module-filename > > The change to use @ in the filename for semver from # is a significant > change, and has come after WGLC. As such, I am requesting that the chairs run > a short WGLC, just on that change, of maybe a week, to make sure there are no > objections. > > The document can be found at > I-D: <draft-ietf-netmod-yang-module-filename-10.txt> > Datatracker URL: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-yang-module-filename/ > > >
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
