Re: [Netconf] restconf and namespaces and unique module names.

[Randy Presuhn <[e-mail]>]

Hi -

>From: Ladislav Lhotka <[e-mail]>
>Sent: Sep 23, 2015 2:15 AM
>To: Randy Presuhn <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
>Subject: Re: [Netconf] restconf and namespaces and unique module names.
...
>>>RFC 6020:
>>>
>>>   The names of all standard modules and submodules MUST be unique.
>>>   Developers of enterprise modules are RECOMMENDED to choose names for
>>>   their modules that will have a low probability of colliding with
>>>   standard or other enterprise modules, e.g., by using the enterprise
>>>   or organization name as a prefix for the module name.
>>>
>>>Apparently, both module names in the example violate this. Note that
>>>module names are used to resolve imports and hence they better are
>>>unique. For the IETF, we can manage that via the IANA registry. For
>>>the other modules, there is a clear recommendation.
>>
>> A couple of questions on the RFC 6020 text cited...
>>
>>   (1) is "standard modules" intended to include those from *all* SDOs?
>>  
>>   (2) "MUST" is normally used in situations where "if you don't
>>       do this this way, this protocol/process won't work correctly."
>
>This is not the case unless different modules of the same name are used
>by the same server.

(1) My question remains: why a "MUST" for "standard" modules but
    not enterprise ones?  It sounds like you're arguing that a
    "SHOULD" or "RECOMMENDED" would suffice in both cases.

(2) A question of curiousity: what does a client do when it encounters
    different servers using different modules of the same name, and
    how does it know they are indeed different, using only mandatory
    features of the protocol and mandatory-to-implement models?

Randy