[IANA #1233818] Early review: draft-ietf-teas-rfc8776-update (IETF 114)

[italobusi]

Dear Authors,

Before the IETF meeting, we check documents listed on working group agendas for IANA-related issues. We have a few questions about this one:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-teas-rfc8776-update

The IANA Considerations section says, "This document updates the ietf-te-types YANG module registered by [RFC8776]. Therefore this document does not require any IANA actions."

Doesn't this mean that the ietf-te-types YANG module in the IANA repository needs to be updated? If so, IANA would create a second entry for ietf-te-types at https://www.iana.org/assignments/yang-parameters that a) lists this document as the reference and b) links to the updated version of the module file. (In most registries, the original entry would be replaced, but this is not the case for YANG Module Names.)

If this is not correct, the IANA Considerations section should make it clear that the updated version of the module will not be added to the IANA registry.

Another question: if the module is being updated, would this document be listed as a reference for ietf-te-types at https://www.iana.org/assignments/xml-registry? If so, would it be a replacement reference (typical for obsoletions) or an additional reference?

If changes need to be made to the YANG and/or XML ns registries, one approach to writing the text might be to take the appropriate items from RFC 8776's IANA Considerations section and use the term "updates" instead of "registers."

If you have any questions, just let us know. If you'd like to talk in person, you can find us next to the RFC Editor's table from Monday through Thursday.

Best regards,

Amanda Baber IANA Operations Manager

[italobusi]

I think Amanda is right and we should update the IANA sections as she suggests