On Mon, 2019-10-21 at 14:54 +0000, Kent Watsen wrote: > Hi Lada, > > > Another option, also suggested in DNSOP WG, was to enable YANG to refer > > directly to the IANA registry. > > For crypto types, I don’t know if this it possible, as there may be many > registries involved. > > Regardless, what is it that is doing the referring? an identityref? there > needs to be a module update, not just a ref, right? or do you mean that the > type is “string” and the values are documented to be from said IANA > registries?
This is of course a good question. I think an implicit enumeration could be a good fit for many registries. > > > > The problem with this is that we have no formalism for writing such > > templates. > > True. > > > > How about preparing an initial revision of the module, without writing any > > > RFC, and hand it over to IANA to be published as a > > > supplement to the registry? > > I don’t understand. Can you give a sketch of what you have in mind? Just prepare the module and run it through some defined approval procedure. The module will become official as soon as IANA publishes it on the "YANG Parameters" page [1]. After that, IANA will update the module each time the registry changes - the instructions for updates may be a part of the module description. But there will be no RFC connected to the module. Lada [1] https://www.iana.org/assignments/yang-parameters/yang-parameters.xhtml > > > > Kent > > -- Ladislav Lhotka Head, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67 _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
