Re: [mpls] [netmod] [Teas] Use of schema mounts for common model

[Balazs Lengyel <[e-mail]>]

Hello,

As I see it the problem is that as we don't know the mount relationships early. All you can say in the constraint is "point at some interface". So having a specific path statement is not feasible.

Using instance-identifiers may help. While it is hard it is not impossible to constrain instance-identifiers. You can put a regular expression on their "string" representation, e.g.  rematch(.,'/.*/interface[name=.*]')

 This would alow you to point at an interface anywhere (as long as the list is named interface with a key called name :-( ). Note the regexp is not 100% OK.
regards Balazs

On 2016-04-29 22:55, Xufeng Liu wrote:

We still hope that schema mount can handle cross-referencing across mounted
modules. It is also needed when ietf-interfaces model is mounted to
logical-network-element  and network-instance models.

More comments for this case below in-line.

Thanks,

- Xufeng

-----Original Message-----
From: Teas [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Joel M. Halpern
Sent: Friday, April 29, 2016 1:05 PM
To: Tarek Saad (tsaad) <[e-mail]>; Martin Bjorklund

<[e-mail]>

Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail];
[e-mail]; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [Teas] [netmod] Use of schema mounts for common model

With regard to leafrefs trying to point into groupings, would

instance-identifiers

work for your use case?

In this case, it would be hard to specify the must conditions for these
instance-identifiers to make them always applicable when the groupings are
used in various situations. If we are willing to re-structure everything,
the method used in draft-halpern-supa-generic-policy-data-model could be an
option to explore. 

Yours,
Joel

On 4/29/16 12:17 PM, Tarek Saad (tsaad) wrote:

Thanks Martin, please see inline..


On 2016-04-29, 6:29 AM, "Martin Bjorklund" <[e-mail]
<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:

    "Tarek Saad (tsaad)" <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>

wrote:

        Hi authors/WG,
        In draft-ietf-teas-yang-te, we are driving the definition for a
        generic TE YANG model that can/may be used (and extended when
        necessary) for different data plane technologies (e.g. MPLS,
        OTN, WDM,
        etc.).
        Reviewing the schema mount idea presented in
        draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount, we are thinking this proposal is
        useful and can facilitate the reuse of the our model in multiple
        places in the YANG tree (once per each technology), e.g.:
        ./mpls/mount-points/mount-point/module=ietf-te.yang
        ./otn/mount-points/mount-point/module=ietf-te.yang


    Schema mount is probably not the right solution to your problem.  I
    think a better solution in your case is to define groupings.
    Groupings are designed to be re-used at different places in the
    hierarchy.


We thought of this earlier, and found groupings pose their own set of
challenges too.. Specifically:
- a groupings with leafrefs could not reference data nodes that reside
in another grouping
- a grouping with leafrefs of relative path were challenge when the
relative path references data nodes outside the grouping
- the augmentation of the grouping by other modules is not as
straightforward

That said, the grouping proposal seems to

one could also think that with groupings one could address reuse of
the a model (e.g. Ietf-interfaces) for logical devices or VM (see
below). In fact, in your draft (section 2) you explicitly discourage
this approach as not scalable solution


   With the "uses" approach, ietf-interfaces would have to define a
   grouping with all its nodes, and the new model for logical devices
   would have to use this grouping.  This is a not a scalable solution,
   since every time there is a new model defined, we would have to
   update our model for logical devices to use a grouping from the new
   model.  Another problem is that this approach cannot handle vendor-



        We have a comment/concern/suggestion and we value your feedback.
        The generic TE model currently references data nodes in the

global

        tree (e.g. from the ietf-interfaces model to define additional

TE

        properties associated with a specific device interface). Our
        understanding after reading section 3.1 of your draft is the

mounted

        model can *not* reference any data nodes outside the scope of

the

        mount-point (e.g. global data nodes in the yang tree). This

poses a

        limitation for us, do you have a suggestion for this problem?
        One possible solution we thought of was to replace the leaf-refs
        pointing to the global data nodes (e.g. Ietf-interfaces) with
        context
        names (e.g. the interface name).. This decouples the data-nodes
        defined in the TE generic model from those in the global tree
        (e.g. the actual interface ietf-interfaces model). Any feedback

on

        this or better suggestions?

In this case, there are multiple augmentations to ietf-te.yang, such as
ietf-rsvp-te and ietf-sr-te. If ietf-te is a grouping, we cannot do the
augmentations before ietf-te is used. Using the grouping would be very
awkward when ietf-te is used. We would have to make the same many
augmentations at that time. Even worse, there could be future augmentations,
we cannot specify these augmentations now because they are not defined yet.

    If you use groupings instead, you can still use proper leafrefs.


Not in all cases - as described above.

Regards,
Tarek



    /martin



        Regards,
        Tarek
        Excerpt from draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount
        3.1<https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount" rel="nofollow">https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount-

01#section-3.1>.

        Augment and Validation in Mounted Data
            All paths (in leafrefs, instance-identifiers, XPath
        expressions, and
            target nodes of augments) in the data models mounted at a
        mount point
            are interpreted with the mount point as the root node, and

the

            mounted data nodes as its children.  This means that data
        within a
            mounted subtree can never refer to data outside of this

subtree.

_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod" rel="nofollow">https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

_______________________________________________
Teas mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas" rel="nofollow">https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas

_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod" rel="nofollow">https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

-- 
Balazs Lengyel                       Ericsson Hungary Ltd.
Senior Specialist
Mobile: [phone]              email: [e-mail]