Subject: [yang-doctors] Question about implementation of yang modules for recently published RFC

From: Michelle Cotton <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2021 22:02:31 +0000

Hello Yang Doctors!

Quick question about implementation of RFC 9132.

For the IANA maintained Yang, iana-dots-signal-channel, the RFC-Editor sent us a replacement yang file.

In this case, do we just delete the older yang file and completely replace it with the new one?

At https://www.iana.org/assignments/yang-parameters we point the iana-dots-signal-channel entry to the newer yang file.

Then we’ll update https://www.iana.org/assignments/iana-dots-signal-channel/iana-dots-signal-channel.xhtml so that it points to the newer yang file and update the RFC.

Do we have that correct?

For the ietf-dots-signal-channel yang, an additional entry was added since it is not IANA maintained (per previous instructions from Benoit).

Thanks for any confirmation you can provide!

--Michelle

Michelle Cotton

Protocol Parameters Engagement Sr. Manger

IANA Services

---

From: Martin Björklund <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 06 Sep 2021 15:52:05 +0200 (CEST)

Hi,

> replace it with the new one?

Yes I think that's the right procedure.  For iana-if-type.yang, that's
what you do everytime a new interface is added, so I think it is ok in
this case as well.

>  
> 
> At https://www.iana.org/assignments/yang-parameters we point the
> iana-dots-signal-channel entry to the newer yang file.
> 
>  
> 
> Then we’ll update
> https://www.iana.org/assignments/iana-dots-signal-channel/iana-dots-signal-channel.xhtml
> so that it points to the newer yang file and update the RFC.
> 
>  
> 
> Do we have that correct?

Yes.

> 
> For the ietf-dots-signal-channel yang, an additional entry was added
> since it is not IANA maintained (per previous instructions from
> Benoit).

I don't understad if this comment is related to the question above...?

/martin

---

From: Ladislav Lhotka <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2021 10:03:31 +0200

Hi,

this is unrelated to Michelle's question but...

It seems it is somewhat complicated for IANA to maintain YANG modules mirroring IANA registries. I am thinking about using the approach of RFC 9108 on a larger scale - specifically, developing XSLT stylesheets that would take the online XML format of an IANA registry and transform it to a YANG module. This way, IANA would only maintain the registries, but YANG modellers can always obtain a YANG module corresponding to the up-to-date revision of the registry.

Moreover, there would be some hope that important IANA registries can be made available to YANG before the end of the universe - it took three years to finish RFC 9108 in DNSOP WG.

What do you think?

Lada

Michelle Cotton <[email-masked]> writes:

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

-- 
Ladislav Lhotka
Head, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67

---

From: Jürgen Schönwälder <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2021 11:41:56 +0200

Lada,

I think it is highly desirable to have an automated workflow that
avoids manual work as much as possible. Creating such a workflow,
however, may not be easy and might require a couple of hackathons in
order to weed out the corner cases that will show up (and I expect
there to be quite a few of them if you look at the larger universe of
IANA registries).

So it boils down to who brings up the energy for working on this. If
you have time for it, you have my ideological support but I may not be
able to contribute much to it (and I am not good at xslt transforms in
particular). Back in a day, I would likely have contributed to such an
activity during IETF meetings, but in the modern times with meetings
that tend to do not get me anymore out of my everyday life, activities
like this tend to find no time anymore.

/js

-- 
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: Ladislav Lhotka <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2021 13:11:23 +0200

> there to be quite a few of them if you look at the larger universe of

Technically, the biggest problem is that I haven't been able to find any
schema or other definition of the XML format used, so one doesn't really
know what to expect in the next registry. Somebody also told me that
IANA is considering an upgrade of this XML format. If it is so, then it
might be worthwhile to prepare an interface to YANG along with it.

> like this tend to find no time anymore.

Everything needn't be done at once, and addressing one or a few
registries at a time doesn't mean a terrible aount of work. In any case,
after the experience with RFC 9108 I am not much motivated to continue
in the same way with other registries that are necessary for DNS (or
whatever).

It could be a topic for an IETF hackathon, but I was thinking simply
about starting a new Github repo. I also know that XSLT language is a
bit obscure but, on the other hand, it is a perfect fit for this use
case, and xsltproc is a ubiquitous tool across all platforms.

Thanks, Lada