Hi,

I haven't received any responses to my message below but, given the recent discussion in DNSOP and IETF mailing list, I believe it is important to address this discrepancy in order not to give ammunition to those who oppose mirroring IANA registries in YANG modules.

Lada

Ladislav Lhotka <lho...@nic.cz> writes:

Hi, sec. 7.21.2 of RFC 7950 defines the "deprecated" and "obsolete" statuses as follows: o "deprecated" indicates an obsolete definition, but it permits new/continued implementation in order to foster interoperability with older/existing implementations. o "obsolete" means that the definition is obsolete and SHOULD NOT be implemented and/or can be removed from implementations. Then, RFC 7224 contains these instructions in the IANA Considerations section: "status": Include only if a registration has been deprecated (use the value "deprecated") or obsoleted (use the value "obsolete"). However, RFC 8126 defines the meaning of the status terms in IANA registries (sec. 9.6) in the following way: Specific entries in a registry can be marked as "obsolete" (no longer in use) or "deprecated" (use is not recommended). I would say that "deprecated" means something else here than in YANG. For example, the RSA/MD5 algorithm in [1] is marked as "deprecated" because it was found weak, and implementing it to "foster interoperability" can hardly be recommended. Instead, "SHOULD NOT implement" applies here, too. I think it would be good to either align the semantics of "deprecated" in YANG with IANA registries, or at least map both IANA terms to "obsolete" in YANG. Lada [1] https://www.iana.org/assignments/dns-sec-alg-numbers/dns-sec-alg-numbers.xhtml -- Ladislav Lhotka Head, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67 _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

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

_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

Reply via email to