Hi Amanda, all,
As you rightfully mentioned, we do currently have:
- If a new registration uses an identifier that does not comply
with the naming conventions listed in Section 4.3.1, IANA
should check if a guidance to generate legal identifiers was
supplied in the RFC that specified the initial version of the
module. If no such guidance is available, IANA should check
the latest revision of the IANA-maintained module for similar
patterns. If all else failed, IANA should seek advice from
relevant registry experts (e.g., designated experts for a
registry with Expert Review policy (Section 4.5 of [RFC8126])
or responsible Area Director).
The key point is to seek guidance from relevant registry experts. YANG Doctors
may not have that knowledge. That’s said, an AD can dispatch a request to them
if he think that’s useful.
I don’t think a change is needed here.
Cheers,
Med
De : Amanda Baber <[email protected]>
Envoyé : mercredi 4 juin 2025 03:35
À : Mahesh Jethanandani <[email protected]>
Cc : BOUCADAIR Mohamed INNOV/NET <[email protected]>; Eric Vyncke
<[email protected]>; The IESG <[email protected]>;
[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
Kent Watsen <[email protected]>; [email protected]
Objet : Re: [Ext] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on
draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8407bis-25: (with COMMENT)
[AB] The initial example was that ‘3des-cbc’ should be written as ‘tripleDes’,
and not knowing how to pronounce ‘3des-cbc’, we wondered if we were being given
general guidance as to how to write out numbers that appear at the beginning of
a name (e.g., a name beginning with ‘2’ would be presented as ‘double’). ‘6to4’
seemed to be the only readily available counterexample. (And it’s not uncommon
for a newly-created IANA-maintained YANG module to include registrations that
are 20+ years old.)
I would agree that the general guidance of spelling out numbers starts to fall
apart with some of these examples. Maybe a statement that says that in cases
where a translation is not apparent to IANA, it should consult with YANG
doctors on how they would like to see the identity spelt out. Would that help?
[AB2] Right now the document points us to the experts for the registry itself,
if applicable, or the ADs, but doesn’t mention the YANG doctors. Should that be
changed?
Thanks,
Amanda
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
