Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8342 (5514)

2018-12-18 Thread Rohit R Ranade
; NetMod WG ; RFC Errata System Subject: Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8342 (5514) > After reading the RFC details, it seems that the example is intentional based > on > the text about NP-containers. > > I think an errata could be used because the sentence about a t

Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8342 (5514)

2018-10-08 Thread Kent Watsen
> After reading the RFC details, it seems that the example is intentional based > on > the text about NP-containers. > > I think an errata could be used because the sentence about a top-level origin > must be defined > could be interpreted to define "top-level" as the topmost level for which the

Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8342 (5514)

2018-10-08 Thread Andy Bierman
On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 9:03 AM, Lou Berger wrote: > > > On 10/8/2018 10:13 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > >> On Mon, Oct 08, 2018 at 08:57:33AM -0400, Lou Berger wrote: >> >>> I think it's clear that the reviewers, notably myself as shepherd, missed >>> that this is a lowercase "must" and sho

Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8342 (5514)

2018-10-08 Thread Lou Berger
Hi Rob, On 10/8/2018 9:51 AM, Robert Wilton wrote: Hi Lou, On 08/10/2018 13:57, Lou Berger wrote: Hi Rob/All, Keep in mind that the document says what it says and that to change text really requires a new version. On 10/8/2018 6:01 AM, Robert Wilton wrote: So there seem to be two availabl

Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8342 (5514)

2018-10-08 Thread Lou Berger
On 10/8/2018 10:13 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: On Mon, Oct 08, 2018 at 08:57:33AM -0400, Lou Berger wrote: I think it's clear that the reviewers, notably myself as shepherd, missed that this is a lowercase "must" and should have asked for clarification during the review process. Having

Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8342 (5514)

2018-10-08 Thread Juergen Schoenwaelder
On Mon, Oct 08, 2018 at 08:57:33AM -0400, Lou Berger wrote: > > I think it's clear that the reviewers, notably myself as shepherd, missed > that this is a lowercase "must" and should have asked for clarification > during the review process. > > Having an errata saying this "must" really is a "MUS

Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8342 (5514)

2018-10-08 Thread Robert Wilton
Hi Lou, On 08/10/2018 13:57, Lou Berger wrote: Hi Rob/All, Keep in mind that the document says what it says and that to change text really requires a new version. On 10/8/2018 6:01 AM, Robert Wilton wrote: So there seem to be two available solutions here: (i) The server MUST provide an or

Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8342 (5514)

2018-10-08 Thread Lou Berger
Hi Rob/All, Keep in mind that the document says what it says and that to change text really requires a new version. On 10/8/2018 6:01 AM, Robert Wilton wrote: So there seem to be two available solutions here: (i) The server MUST provide an origin value for the top level datanode, This is pr

Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8342 (5514)

2018-10-08 Thread Robert Wilton
So there seem to be two available solutions here: (i) The server MUST provide an origin value for the top level datanode, but for NP containers it can use whatever origin value it likes - since the origin value imparts no direct meaning other than the default origin that descendants acquire if

Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8342 (5514)

2018-10-07 Thread Juergen Schoenwaelder
On Sun, Oct 07, 2018 at 09:49:57AM -0700, Andy Bierman wrote: > > Can somebody explain the rationale for the highlighted text from 5.3.4? Note the difference between "applies to" and "carries". A non-presence container has no relevance for configuration and hence an origin value does not *apply* t

Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8342 (5514)

2018-10-07 Thread Andy Bierman
On Sat, Oct 6, 2018 at 11:47 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder < j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 05, 2018 at 09:53:32AM -0700, Andy Bierman wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 9:12 AM, Lou Berger wrote: > > > > > My personal opinion (with any hat on) is that it isn't appropriate

Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8342 (5514)

2018-10-06 Thread Juergen Schoenwaelder
On Fri, Oct 05, 2018 at 09:53:32AM -0700, Andy Bierman wrote: > On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 9:12 AM, Lou Berger wrote: > > > My personal opinion (with any hat on) is that it isn't appropriate to make > > a technical change that impacts implementation in an errata. > > Clarifications of original intent

Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8342 (5514)

2018-10-05 Thread Andy Bierman
On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 9:12 AM, Lou Berger wrote: > My personal opinion (with any hat on) is that it isn't appropriate to make > a technical change that impacts implementation in an errata. > Clarifications of original intent, corrections of inconsistencies and > editorial corrections are perfect

Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8342 (5514)

2018-10-05 Thread Lou Berger
My personal opinion (with any hat on) is that it isn't appropriate to make a technical change that impacts implementation in an errata.  Clarifications of original intent, corrections of inconsistencies and editorial corrections are perfectly appropriate.  I'm happy to learn that this intended

Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8342 (5514)

2018-10-05 Thread Juergen Schoenwaelder
Well, if you think an errata does not work, we can file a one page document with N pages of boilerplate around it. /js On Fri, Oct 05, 2018 at 08:14:33AM -0400, Lou Berger wrote: > Juergen, > >     The document says what it says, i.e., "The origin for any top-level > configuration data nodes mus

Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8342 (5514)

2018-10-05 Thread Lou Berger
Juergen,     The document says what it says, i.e., "The origin for any top-level configuration data nodes must be specified."  Changes to this would require a BIS or an RFC that updates this document. Lou On 10/5/2018 6:14 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: Hi, the authors have been discuss

Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8342 (5514)

2018-10-05 Thread Robert Wilton
I agree that we need to reach a conclusion on the discussion before we can know what to do with this errata. Thanks, Rob On 05/10/2018 11:14, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: Hi, the authors have been discussing whether the top-level requirement is too strict but there has not been a clear concl

Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8342 (5514)

2018-10-05 Thread Juergen Schoenwaelder
Hi, the authors have been discussing whether the top-level requirement is too strict but there has not been a clear conclusion yet I think. In the example, all nodes to have a defined origin and hence the origin at the root will have zero effect. /js On Fri, Oct 05, 2018 at 02:48:08AM -0700, RFC