[Resend to hopefully pass recipient limit filter] Hi Tom,
I would be interested to hear from the original authors. My impression is that this is a technically reasonable change, but I don't think that an erratum can create a new revision of a YANG module. If this erratum was processed as "Hold for document update" then would that be sufficient to do the right thing in the MPLS YANG module? Regards, Rob > -----Original Message----- > From: tom petch <ie...@btconnect.com> > Sent: 10 August 2020 17:32 > To: RFC Errata System <rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org>; lho...@nic.cz; Acee > Lindem (acee) <a...@cisco.com>; yingzhen...@huawei.com; war...@kumari.net; > Rob Wilton (rwilton) <rwil...@cisco.com>; joe...@bogus.com; > kent+i...@watsen.net; lber...@labn.net > Cc: ts...@juniper.net; netmod@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8349 (6251) > > From: netmod <netmod-boun...@ietf.org> on behalf of RFC Errata System > <rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org> > Sent: 07 August 2020 16:45 > > <tp> > This is the erratum of whose arrival I speculated on this list on June > 16th. > > There is a degree of urgency about it. The I-D in question is mpls-base- > yang, currently in IETF Last Call, which is a Normative dependency of bfd- > yang which is a Normative dependency for a small mountain of I-D which > have been waiting a year or so (e.g. ospf-yang). > > I suspect that the technically perfect solution would involve a YANG > union, choice or some such structure but as I said in my Last Call comment > I can live with a label that contains such as 'address' encompassing such > as 'label' in the context of forwarding. I take labels to mean what > labels mean rather than what I might find in a work of reference. > > Tom Petch > > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC8349, > "A YANG Data Model for Routing Management (NMDA Version)". > > -------------------------------------- > You may review the report below and at: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6251 > > -------------------------------------- > Type: Technical > Reported by: Tarek Saad <ts...@juniper.net> > > Section: 7 > > Original Text > ------------- > The RPC "active-route" is used to retrieve the active route in a RIB. > RFC8349 defined two AFIs (v4/v6). > > draft-ietf-mpls-base-yang is defining a new RIB AFI for MPLS as per > section 3 in RFC8349. > > The RPC has a "MUST" statement that all RIBs must augment input > parameters with a leaf named 'destination-address'. > > For MPLS RIB, it makes sense to augment with leaf named 'local-label' > since MPLS routes are identified by MPLS label. > > We ask to make the following change: > > OLD: > action active-route { > description > "Return the active RIB route that is used for the > destination address. > > Address-family-specific modules MUST augment input > parameters with a leaf named 'destination-address'."; > > > Corrected Text > -------------- > NEW: > action active-route { > description > "Return the active RIB route that is used for the > destination address. > > Address-family-specific modules MUST augment input > parameters with a suitable leaf that identifies the > route."; > > > Notes > ----- > > > Instructions: > ------------- > This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please > use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or > rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party > can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. > > -------------------------------------- > RFC8349 (draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8022bis-11) > -------------------------------------- > Title : A YANG Data Model for Routing Management (NMDA > Version) > Publication Date : March 2018 > Author(s) : L. Lhotka, A. Lindem, Y. Qu > Category : PROPOSED STANDARD > Source : Network Modeling > Area : Operations and Management > Stream : IETF > Verifying Party : IESG > > _______________________________________________ > 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
