Re: [Netconf] Last Call: <draft-ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis-06.txt> (YANG Library) to Proposed Standard

[Robert Wilton <[e-mail]>]

Hi Tom,

It is entirely up to the server implementation to decide what modules 
should be put together into a single module set.

Some examples of categories that could be used to group different 
related modules together:

(i) Modules that are common across all datastores, vs modules that are 
only used for particular datastores (e.g. a dynamic datastore).

(ii) Modules for different versions of software could be reported as 
separate module sets.  Only the module set(s) associated with a 
particular software version would expect to be used.  This hypothetical 
example is from the YANG versioning work, and may or may not become a 
recommendation depending on how that work pans out ...

(iii) Sometimes vendors want to split their software up into separate 
packages, and module sets could be used to represent these different 
packages (e.g. core, vs L2VPN, vs L3VPN, vs Subscribers, etc).

(iv) Sometimes devices need to support different schemas at the same 
time (e.g. The IETF ecosystem, vs OpenConfig ecosystem, vs vendor native 
ecosystem).  Again, this is another case where module sets may be useful 
to differentiate between the different groups.

Of course, if a server is very simple, and none of the above applies, 
then it could choose to have just a single module set.

Does that help clarify their potential usage?

Thanks,
Rob


On 02/07/2018 11:32, t.petch wrote:
> One aspect of this leaves me puzzled; what is a module set?
>
> Yes, I see that a data store schema is made up of module sets, which are
> made up of modules, but given, say, 40 modules, what criteria decide
> whether this is one set of 40, two of 20, half a dozen of varying size
> or what?
>
> Tom Petch
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "The IESG" <[e-mail]>
> To: "IETF-Announce" <[e-mail]>
> Cc: <[e-mail]>; <[e-mail]>;
> <[e-mail]>; <[e-mail]>;
> <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2018 5:22 PM
>
>> The IESG has received a request from the Network Configuration WG
> (netconf)
>> to consider the following document: - 'YANG Library'
>>    <draft-ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis-06.txt> as Proposed Standard
>>
>> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
> final
>> comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
>> [e-mail] mailing lists by 2018-06-28. Exceptionally, comments may
> be
>> sent to [e-mail] instead. In either case, please retain the
> beginning of
>> the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
>>
>> Abstract
>>
>>
>>     This document describes a YANG library that provides information
>>     about the YANG modules, datastores, and datastore schemas used by a
>>     network management server.  Simple caching mechanisms are provided
> to
>>     allow clients to minimize retrieval of this information.  This
>>     version of the YANG library supports the Network Management
> Datastore
>>     Architecture by listing all datastores supported by a network
>>     management server and the schema that is used by each of these
>>     datastores.
>>
>>     This document obsoletes RFC 7895.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> The file can be obtained via
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis/
>>
>> IESG discussion can be tracked via
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis/ballot/
>>
>>
>> No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.
>>
>>
>>
>>
> .
>