Re: [Netconf] Issue #2 for binary encoding: Should the new encoding include the Message layer?

[Andy Bierman <[e-mail]>]

On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 1:16 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder <
[e-mail]> wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 09:46:27AM +0200, Carsten Bormann wrote:
> > In Jun 26, 2018, at 03:46, Andy Bierman <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > >
> > > CBOR does not support metadata at all.
> >
> > I’m trying to follow this discussion, but I can’t process this sentence.
> >
> > What is “metadata” here?  Or, maybe, what is “support”?
> > (You certainly can encode any kind of metadata in CBOR.)
> >
>
> Carsten,
>
> YANG definitions translate to values of XML elements. We in addition
> use XML attributes to carry metadata, for example following RFC 7952.
> See section 5 of RFC 7952 for details how this works with the XML and
> JSON encodings.
>
> Note that what we call meanwhile metadata did exist before 7952 came
> along: the NETCONF protocol operations use XML attributes to control
> how the edit is carried out, see section 7.2 of RFC 6241. Hence, in
> order to run NETCONF over a different encoding, we need a convention
> to carry metadata along with the data.
>
>

I think CBOR+SID can support attributes without any changes to either of
them.
If each attribute is numbered (e.g., SID numbers annotation-stmts), then
the encoding looks the same as an augmenting leaf. It is just another leaf
that happens
to have a SID value from a different module range.



/js
>

Andy


>
> --
> Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
> Phone: [phone]         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
> Fax:   [phone]         <https://www.jacobs-university.de/>
>