On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 7:15 PM, Dale R. Worley <wor...@ariadne.com> wrote:
> William Lupton <wlup...@broadband-forum.org> writes: > > Regardless of the discussion about “published”, other organisations > > may be planning to use YANG modules that are currently within > > IDs. Obviously it’s vastly preferable if such IDs become RFCs before > > these other organisations publish any specifications or data models > > that use such draft IETF YANG, but it might occasionally be necessary > > to reference a draft model (hopefully one that has already been sent > > for AD review) in a published standard. This is why I would like the > > clarification to cover IDs (at least WG-adopted ones)! > > Unfortunately, this sort of problem has to be considered. I remember > when the "SIP multiple line appearances" draft was being worked on. > Ultimately, there were products on the market that supported the -03 > version, the -04 version, and the final (RFC) version. > > My suggestion is that any time a version of a module is "published", it > must either be identical to the previous "published" version, or have a > newer revision date. As far as I can see, the *practical* meaning of > "published" is a document that has a permanent URL, because you can't > convince a customer that a document is a "specification" if it doesn't > have a stable URL. For Internet Drafts, that seems to mean each > numbered version entered into the Data Tracker. > The current text says the revision date MUST be updated if the YANG module changed at all. Seems clear to me. I think I will add a reference to RFC 2026, sec. 2.2 to use the term "published" specification An Internet-Draft is NOT a means of "publishing" a specification; Andy > > But there is a further problem: A sequence of versions of a module with > different revision dates are required to be related by the rules of > section 11 of RFC 6020 (or draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis), i.e., each > newer version is a proper extension of the older version(s). Clearly, > we *don't* want to have that constraint between versions of modules in a > sequence of I-Ds, we want to be able to delete elements. > > Dale > > ___________ Andy > ____________________________________ > netmod mailing list > netmod@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod >
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
