Add missing yang modules

[pjaitken]

No description provided.

[einarnn]

@pjaitken we don't normally take PRs here for either vendor or IETF models. Since the IETF maintain their own editing process, the best path is usually via the WG for the model, followed by the automated sync. @xorrkaz may want to comment more.

[xorrkaz]

Yeah, I've got a big set of modules to PR. But the damn commit trail is still giving me grief. Let me poke at it some more now.

[pjaitken]

@einarnn / @xorrkaz

Are you syncin'g from IANA's yang-parameters? Their rsync and ftp was broken.

I see you've now picked up the new versions of all these yang models except for [email protected] - you're currently hosting [email protected].

BTW, https://www.yangcatalog.org/contribute.html implies that contributions are accepted.

[einarnn]

@pjaitken The contributions noted there are for the Yang Catalog. The "policy" I try to follow is that YangModels/yang contributions are mastered by the owner of the models. In the case of this model the owner is the IETF. If you can coordinate with the IETF and get agreement that they "bless" your changes, that may be fine. But @xorrkaz, as the owner of the automated model update process, has to be onboard.

[xorrkaz]

The YANG Catalog code only parses the yang-parameters.xml file for IANA modules. IETF modules that have had merged errata do not get updated (as far as I can tell). I think if you have a desire to fold in this errata now, I'm okay with it if Einar is. Ideally, this gets incorporated into the yc.o automation in the future.

[einarnn]

The YANG Catalog code only parses the yang-parameters.xml file for IANA modules. IETF modules that have had merged errata do not get updated (as far as I can tell). I think if you have a desire to fold in this errata now, I'm okay with it if Einar is. Ideally, this gets incorporated into the yc.o automation in the future.

@xorrkaz, @pjaitken if errata are being addressed in the module I think it needs to be a new version of the module and hence a new file. I don't know if the IETF yet has a process defined for this?

If it is done as a new revision of the model, I'm good with it as long as the IETF is. @xorrkaz, are you able to clarify? (For clarity, what I'm worried about is an automated approach that would see @pjaitken's updates wiped out by the automation...)

[xorrkaz]

There is a procedure already. IANA is doing this and publishing a new module. In the case of ietf-alarms.yang, they added the errata and release revision 2022-06-06 (which is documented in the yang-parameters.xml file). Automation wouldn't wipe this out as it would simply ignore the file since it's already in the repo.

[einarnn]

There is a procedure already. IANA is doing this and publishing a new module. In the case of ietf-alarms.yang, they added the errata and release revision 2022-06-06 (which is documented in the yang-parameters.xml file). Automation wouldn't wipe this out as it would simply ignore the file since it's already in the repo.

In that case, I'll commit this PR (which only adds new revisions) and review the other PR.