Re: WG Review: NETCONF Data Modeling Language (netmod)

Wes Hardaker <wjhns1@hardakers.net> Wed, 23 April 2008 21:56 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietf-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ietf-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3EC2828C2EB; Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:56:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF0EF3A68E6 for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:56:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.778
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.778 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.210, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_NET=0.611]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ul2DSE80Ri4K for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:56:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wes.hardakers.net (dcn236-43.dcn.davis.ca.us [168.150.236.43]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 783293A6C3B for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:56:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wes.hardakers.net (wlap.dyn.hardakers.net [127.0.0.1]) by wes.hardakers.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14E422F2EEB; Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:56:41 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=0.5; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=hardakers.net; h=received:from:to:cc:subject:organization:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version:content-type; q=dns/txt; s=wesmail; bh=u4IrP+HdtjUUf0kfEcaycyr7bzQ=; b=ineU0WZxJBh85Zj28ydirPwaqfyqZKF/K2zELOkzFSjDMjHdMaU0MoY2yeDI0sX+2J3/ap7LBiDpLXn6MKhK3dm6/k9Ih23K2RIdzVlxRZ3YA7cAI3LMYEp4mm3WR3m+5GNeXC4wzTjkWTYTjflerLEsFV5EOqKt620PUU4tkOU=
Received: by wes.hardakers.net (Postfix, from userid 274) id E3C3A2F2EE2; Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:56:40 -0700 (PDT)
From: Wes Hardaker <wjhns1@hardakers.net>
To: Eric Rescorla <ekr@networkresonance.com>
Subject: Re: WG Review: NETCONF Data Modeling Language (netmod)
Organization: Sparta
References: <20080422211401.303175081A@romeo.rtfm.com> <NIEJLKBACMDODCGLGOCNCEGOEMAA.bertietf@bwijnen.net> <20080422215641.09FD05081A@romeo.rtfm.com> <004101c8a4df$d7bfe980$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> <20080423035508.ED17E5081A@romeo.rtfm.com> <480EE7A1.5090408@alvestrand.no> <20080423144502.CACB422E7B1@kilo.rtfm.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:56:40 -0700
In-Reply-To: <20080423144502.CACB422E7B1@kilo.rtfm.com> (Eric Rescorla's message of "Wed, 23 Apr 2008 07:45:02 -0700")
Message-ID: <sdiqy8teuf.fsf@wes.hardakers.net>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.110007 (No Gnus v0.7) XEmacs/21.4.21 (linux, no MULE)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>, ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

>>>>> On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 07:45:02 -0700, Eric Rescorla <ekr@networkresonance.com> said:

ER> I remain concerned that this is the wrong technical approach; it
ER> appears to me to be unnecessary and overcomplicated. However, it's
ER> clear that's a minority opinion, so I'll drop my objection to this
ER> charter.

At the risk of getting things thrown at me:

1) I too actually have issues with the YANG proposal as it stands.
2) But I do think it's a slightly better starting place than the other
   proposals, and thus don't take issue with letting the WG start there.

In particular, I strongly believe (and said this at a mic) that the
result has to optimized for people that don't understand complex
languages like with hard to read syntaxes like XSD, etc.  I think a
different language, like YANG, is necessary as the existing languages
simply don't meet that goal.  YANG does meet this goal better than
others but I don't think it goes far enough.  But I don't think the
creation of the working group will mean changes can't be made to the
results of a design team.  Generically speaking, a design team is tasked
with doing the best they can but it is still up to working group
consensus to say "that'll do" or "that'll do with these modifications".
-- 
Wes Hardaker
Sparta, Inc.
_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf