Subject: [netmod] A way forward?

From: Phil Shafer <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2009 08:18:15 -0400

Andy Bierman writes:
>But the most important reason is to protect
>operator readability and usability, not to
>protect implementors.  Code can always be changed.

If this is the key reason, perhaps we can work a compromise.
Readability of identifiers is a usability and style issue, and is
more suitable for the IETF guidelines document than for YANG itself.

Can I suggest that we fix the YANG draft to remove the wording on
identifier length (and the minor interoperability issue that it
brings) and that we make this "64 character hard limit" part of the
"IETF Guidelines for YANG" document?

This allows us to make other identifier guidelines like:

- Do not use multiple adjacent dashes (like 'watch--out')
- Do not mix dashes and underscores (like 'oh-no_you_did-not')
- Do not end with a dash (like 'error-')
- Do not use profanity (like, um, well, you get the idea)

or whatever additional guidelines we want.  Such guidelines are not
suitable for YANG itself, but will make a perfect addition to the
guidelines document.

This proposal would allow future-proofing, removes the CLR, but
still allow toolsets that are only targeting IETF work to rely on
this restriction.

Thanks,
 Phil

---

From: Ladislav Lhotka <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 03 Apr 2009 15:01:51 +0200

> "IETF Guidelines for YANG" document?

+1

Lada

-- 
Ladislav Lhotka, CESNET
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C

---

From: Andy Bierman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 03 Apr 2009 08:22:42 -0700

> "IETF Guidelines for YANG" document?

This does not fix anything.
Either keep the current text or
change it to match the SMIv2 text.

> still allow toolsets that are only targeting IETF work to rely on

Andy