I've reviewed the open PRs at: https://github.com/anima-wg/voucher/pulls
For most of these, I would say go ahead and merge. One PR still has a bit of
work to do regarding the module representation format (both SID integer and
string-name) for the extensions.
Once merged, people interested can do a thorough review of the entire set of
changes.
> I noticed btw, that there was no SID allocation for manufacturer-private in
> the document. I will fix that in the next few days. I made something up for
> the slides :-)
In PR #81 the YANG leaf is introduced, but no SID number it seems.
Esko
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca>
Sent: vrijdag 21 maart 2025 07:14
To: Esko Dijk <esko.d...@iotconsultancy.nl>
Cc: anima@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Details of proposed voucher "extensions" in Github PR
Esko Dijk <esko.d...@iotconsultancy.nl> wrote:
>> Does the manufacturer-private satisfy your need here?
> Yes, this looks fine. The issue of "hidden communication channel" that
> was raised for this field, would equally be there for standardized
> extensions that import from other YANG modules. E.g. I can always find
> a bstr field from some arbitrary other YANG module, use it as
> extension, and store my hidden data in there.
I noticed btw, that there was no SID allocation for manufacturer-private in
the document. I will fix that in the next few days. I made something up for
the slides :-)
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
-= IPv6 IoT consulting =- *I*LIKE*TRAINS*
_______________________________________________
Anima mailing list -- anima@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to anima-le...@ietf.org
