Subject: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6991-bis-08.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2021 08:18:36 -0800

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Network Modeling WG of the IETF.

        Title           : Common YANG Data Types
        Author          : Juergen Schoenwaelder
	Filename        : draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6991-bis-08.txt
	Pages           : 41
	Date            : 2021-11-07

Abstract:
   This document introduces a collection of common data types to be used
   with the YANG data modeling language.  This document obsoletes RFC
   6991.

The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6991-bis/

There is also an htmlized version available at:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6991-bis-08

A diff from the previous version is available at:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6991-bis-08

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

---

From: Jürgen Schönwälder <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2021 17:36:25 +0100

On Sun, Nov 07, 2021 at 08:18:36AM -0800, [email-masked] wrote:
s.
> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6991-bis-08

This is a mostly editorial update. The draft has no open issues I am
aware of. The WG has to decide whether we wrap this up by sending the
document to WG last call and then through the publication pipeline or
we leave this I-D hanging around just in case more additions get
proposed and finally worked out so that they can be added. In later
case, it is crucial to provide concrete and actionable proposals.
Rough ideas "please add X" where it is left somewhat open what "X"
really boils down to or how "X" will be used makes it difficult to
work out the details.

/js

PS: I have not registered for IETF 112, I guess I will watch the
    session recordings once they are available.

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder           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/>

---

From: "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2021 09:17:59 +0000

Hi Juergen,

My preference would be to last call this document so that other YANG modules can make use of the new types.  We can always spin a future bis document if further common types are useful.

draft-ietf-netmod-yang-module-versioning also makes use of the revision-identifier type defined in this draft.

Regards,
Rob

// As a contributor

-----Original Message-----
From: netmod <[email-masked]> On Behalf Of Jürgen Schönwälder
Sent: 07 November 2021 16:36
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6991-bis-08.txt

/js

_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

---

From: Benoit Claise <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2021 10:36:09 +0100

+1.

Regards, Benoit

---

From: tom petch <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2021 17:14:44 +0000

From: netmod <[email-masked]> on behalf of Jürgen Schönwälder <[email-masked]>
Sent: 07 November 2021 16:36

<tp>

There seems to be more energy for updating MIB modules than there is for updating this:-(

I have had lots of good ideas in the past few years but do not believe that I could ever convince a WG to wait for this to proceed and incorporate them.

draft-ietf-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface recently received a scathing secdir review along the lines that there must be something wrong with the YANG ecosystem that so many obviously generic elements are defined in an individual I-D and not in area-maintained modules.  My reply was that that is the nature of the IETF ecosystem, that it is not conducive to producing generically useful elements for other WG to use in a timely manner.  Sigh.

Tom Petch

/js