Hi, some of you have probably seen the discussions around
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-lhotka-dnsop-iana-class-type-yang-02 We proposed to adopt it as a work item in the DNSOP WG, but despite some support this is probably not going to happen. The substantial objections are: 1. It is not good to publish a YANG snapshot of an IANA registry as an RFC because future implementors will use the module from that RFC and implement registry entries that may have been deprecated in the mean time. 2. The meaning of "deprecated" and "obsolete" defined by IANA (RFC 8126) differs from the definition in RFC 7950. I already raised #2 in this mailing list, and I think it should be addressed in the next version of YANG. Regarding #1, I tried to explain that the RFC is only intended to contain an initial revision of the corresponding YANG module, but it didn't help. One suggestion was to avoid representing the registries as enumerations or sets of identities, and use only integers. I wonder if we can come up with a reasonable solution. Without having the important registries as YANG modules, it is difficult to work on other modules - for DNS, in this case, but it could apply to other areas, too. Thanks, Lada -- Ladislav Lhotka Head, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67 _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
