Re: [core] CBOR Encoding of Data Modeled with YANG

[Alexander Pelov <[e-mail]>]

Dear Juergen,

See inline.

> Le 8 déc. 2015 à 11:55, Juergen Schoenwaelder <[e-mail]> a écrit :
> 
> On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 11:16:58AM +0100, Alexander Pelov wrote:
>> Dear Juergen,
>> 
>> The algorithm is straightforward - assign in increasing order a data 
>> node ID to each element on the schema tree. If you have a revision of a 
>> module, you do the diff between the old and the new tree, and add the 
>> new data node IDs at the end of the numbering.
> 
> So I need access to the complete revision history in order to determine
> data node IDs, correct?

It is not a must. You can manually indicate the node IDs of the newly added elements. If you want a completely automated allocation of IDs, then yes. The way I think this will work is - the publisher of a module will use the automatic tool to generate the statements, which will then be indicated in the YANG definition.

> What about imports without a revision (a nasty
> source of ambiguity)?
> 

There are two points in your question. The first is straightforward - Data node IDs make sense within the scope of a module. Changing a module does not affect the different modules which import it, with the possible exception of groupings, where the classical data node ID algorithm assignment kicks in (or manual ID assignment if the module author prefers so). In any case, I would refer you to RFC 6020, section 5.1.1. where the question of acceptability of imported modules is treated. 

Best,
Alexander
 

> /js
> 
> -- 
> Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
> Phone: [phone]         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
> Fax:   [phone]         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> core mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/core