Re: [Lsr] When to augment LSR base YANG modules...

[Mikael Abrahamsson <[e-mail]>]

On Sat, 30 Mar 2019, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote:

> Additionally, I agree with Yingzhen's comment that it is not clear that 
> we want a separate YANG module for every OSPF/IS-IS feature.

As an operator, I expect to manage my routers using YANG modules. Thus, 
every feature that is introduced that would provide requirement for 
management and/or provide operational data needs to have an YANG module 
come with it, otherwise this new feature isn't useful.

I don't want YANG to be second class citizen compared to CLI the way SNMP 
has been. I also want to avoid having vendor-specific YANG modules if 
possible. Thus it makes sense to require YANG module with every new work.

If this is in the same document or an accompanying document is not of 
importance to me, as long as it gets the YANG module shows up in roughly 
the same timeframe as the feature.

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: [e-mail]