On Wed, 10 Aug 2022 21:47:01 -0700
Jakub Kicinski [off-list ref] wrote:

On Wed, 10 Aug 2022 21:15:34 -0700 Stephen Hemminger wrote:

quoted

Would rather this be part of iproute2 rather than requiring it
to be maintained separately and part of the kernel tree.  

I don't understand what you're trying to say. What is "this", 
what is "separate" from what?

I am saying that ynl could live as a standalone project or as
part of the iproute2 tools collection.

Did I fall victim of the "if the cover letter is too long nobody
actually reads it" problem? Or am I simply too tired to parse?

iproute2 is welcome to use the protocol descriptions like any other
user space, but I'm intending to codegen kernel code based on the YAML:

Ok, that makes sense then. I was hoping that user configuration
of network devices could be done with YAML. But probably that is
best left networkd, netplan, and others.

quoted

quoted

On the kernel side the YAML spec can be used to generate:
 - the C uAPI header
 - documentation of the protocol as a ReST file
 - policy tables for input attribute validation
 - operation tables  

So how can it not be in the kernel tree?

As code generator then sure.