Med's email is about a high-level topic of YANG in experimental docs - that is being dealt separately so please let that part be for now.
We can discuss/close on the YANG parts on my separate thread. Thanks, Ketan On Wed, Jun 4, 2025 at 6:46 PM Jeffrey Haas <jh...@pfrc.org> wrote: > > > On Jun 4, 2025, at 9:12 AM, Jeffrey Haas <jh...@pfrc.org> wrote: > > > > On Jun 3, 2025, at 5:30 PM, Reshad Rahman <res...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > <RR> I do recall that in our discussions we had to have "Updated BFD > IANA" Module only in 1 document. What I don't remember is whether we > considered moving it to draft-ietf-bfd-secure-sequence-numbers instead of > having it in optimizing-authentication. But > draft-ietf-bfd-secure-sequence-numbers > would still depend on bfd-stability since we're moving the documents > together. > > > The fundamental headache is that there are circular dependencies in the > documents. And, there's also a core dependency on assigning code points in > one or more documents and then having the need to have one document only > own the updated IANA module. > > And, as we discussed, even if we pulled the YANG module out into an > uber-YANG module for the three documents, that only mildly cleans up the > dependencies. That's why we left it in one of the documents. > > If IETF decides it wants to have IANA update these modules incrementally > in a different fashion, we can leverage that mythical alternative > methodology. Meanwhile, the documents reflect our best efforts. The IESG > is encouraged to recommend better alternatives. > > > And, perversely, my mail client pulls Ketan and Med's response after I > posted this. So, we can followup there. :-) > > -- Jeff > >
