Re: [Netmod-ver-dt] Update & today's DT meeting
"Rob Wilton (rwilton)" <rwilton@cisco.com> Tue, 04 June 2019 09:15 UTC
Return-Path: <rwilton@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: netmod-ver-dt@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netmod-ver-dt@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3BCF1200B2 for <netmod-ver-dt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Jun 2019 02:15:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.501
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.501 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com header.b=IfzQNaxd; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=C3Ev/LP6
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 31eCRGr0lBs7 for <netmod-ver-dt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Jun 2019 02:15:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com [173.37.86.73]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EFBF1120074 for <netmod-ver-dt@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Jun 2019 02:15:28 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=88390; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1559639729; x=1560849329; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: mime-version; bh=TkVI5RGlx1DnD26SgMphlcU00RkNJG1H00q6UPmXIgQ=; b=IfzQNaxdkBl7Cq4fUPQ5KK7dTN/DAzvMOPtJE8KcNQ15aUrPEhxVeeh9 b++Jn1sG0N6hxQ60PqqyJPZYGddercsmcoaER5+ZvvHJXkkZQy1v5CMG1 LSNXhMg7LwRFfMvZNpyVzF52KKtQx6UEf/DqCz1WiZY66ug4LxjTyoj98 A=;
X-Files: draft-verdt-netmod-yang-module-versioning (2).txt : 60334
IronPort-PHdr: 9a23:fdA8YBT3lCT7tDHSV4CdpipBi9psv++ubAcI9poqja5Pea2//pPkeVbS/uhpkESXBdfA8/wRje3QvuigQmEG7Zub+FE6OJ1XH15g640NmhA4RsuMCEn1NvnvOjYlHcBeU1lN9HCgOk8TE8H7NBXf
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0AWAACVNfZc/4YNJK1jAxoBAQECAgEBAQgCAQEBgVMEAQEBDAGBPSQFJwNqVSAECygKh1EDjnQagj2XL4EuFIEQA1QCBwEBAQwBASMKAgEBhEACglAjNQgOAQMBAQQBAQIBBG0cDIVKAQEBAQIBEggBJQEBMAgEBwICAgEIEQQBASgHAhkXFAkIAQEEARIIBg0HgwGBagMODwECDJxXAoE4iF+CIoJ5AQEFgUZBgwUYgggHCQWBLwGEbF+GDheBQD+BEAFGgU5+PoF5XQsCA4EjCAESAQcCGAUFCwoFBgwCDYJ1giaLMSEDLQIDgWaFGSBThygYjGNqCQKCDoMfgyKEDEKDboRTgiMvOYYMhXWGIoFGjQmBKYVkjCeCbwIEAgQFAg4BAQWBUQE1Z3FwFTuCbAmCFxKBAgECgkiEWTuFPgFygSmNfYEiAYEgAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.60,550,1549929600"; d="txt'?scan'208";a="572473622"
Received: from alln-core-12.cisco.com ([173.36.13.134]) by rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 04 Jun 2019 09:15:26 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-003.cisco.com (xch-aln-003.cisco.com [173.36.7.13]) by alln-core-12.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x549FQQN020295 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 4 Jun 2019 09:15:26 GMT
Received: from xhs-rtp-001.cisco.com (64.101.210.228) by XCH-ALN-003.cisco.com (173.36.7.13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Tue, 4 Jun 2019 04:15:25 -0500
Received: from xhs-aln-001.cisco.com (173.37.135.118) by xhs-rtp-001.cisco.com (64.101.210.228) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Tue, 4 Jun 2019 05:15:24 -0400
Received: from NAM05-CO1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (173.37.151.57) by xhs-aln-001.cisco.com (173.37.135.118) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 4 Jun 2019 04:15:24 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-cisco-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=L+mgV1A5OziHos4zCWjsw39VoSl0HmS8IldC7HYdGK0=; b=C3Ev/LP6L1adJL8aAz97Cmn2l+3IugUyg2f/orxznpbR/nrDEgNyYe466RdbJupd2/H5Y8H49BTzJPpMP/UpEODPgluflLiwCwuX/uJCWUn0ZuHBPTPrxed0527zA2OaNDtNSxQWVZZNwF80Q7f3h92hBLttuNCA3CILqQ5REQM=
Received: from BYAPR11MB2631.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (52.135.227.28) by BYAPR11MB2744.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (52.135.228.10) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.1943.22; Tue, 4 Jun 2019 09:15:22 +0000
Received: from BYAPR11MB2631.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::d837:c1dd:cdb1:bb78]) by BYAPR11MB2631.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::d837:c1dd:cdb1:bb78%7]) with mapi id 15.20.1943.018; Tue, 4 Jun 2019 09:15:22 +0000
From: "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" <rwilton@cisco.com>
To: Balázs Lengyel <balazs.lengyel@ericsson.com>, "netmod-ver-dt@ietf.org" <netmod-ver-dt@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Netmod-ver-dt] Update & today's DT meeting
Thread-Index: AdUA7ICcQCw7J0SOSLq/pvH58/b1PAFgHrawAAUU1gAEHAs9QA==
Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2019 09:15:22 +0000
Message-ID: <BYAPR11MB263149C35B211A8D19356F18B5150@BYAPR11MB2631.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
References: <52c66ea6bad044f78f4af259b30b4a4f@XCH-RCD-007.cisco.com> <BYAPR11MB263103927B254D1726099369B5330@BYAPR11MB2631.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <0b2ff251-c198-062c-1942-c185dc56f8c4@ericsson.com>
In-Reply-To: <0b2ff251-c198-062c-1942-c185dc56f8c4@ericsson.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=rwilton@cisco.com;
x-originating-ip: [173.38.220.56]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 1c65668f-b531-4033-ac69-08d6e8cd2c2f
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(5600148)(711020)(4605104)(1401327)(2017052603328)(49563074)(7193020); SRVR:BYAPR11MB2744;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BYAPR11MB2744:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BYAPR11MB2744DB009C557165873A72D4B5150@BYAPR11MB2744.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000;
x-forefront-prvs: 0058ABBBC7
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(376002)(396003)(39860400002)(136003)(346002)(366004)(13464003)(51444003)(51914003)(189003)(199004)(74316002)(68736007)(229853002)(478600001)(9686003)(2501003)(186003)(55016002)(15650500001)(6436002)(14454004)(99286004)(66574012)(7696005)(3846002)(25786009)(6116002)(66556008)(6506007)(66446008)(66476007)(305945005)(110136005)(33656002)(52536014)(102836004)(99936001)(76176011)(64756008)(316002)(2906002)(86362001)(8676002)(81156014)(486006)(8936002)(81166006)(476003)(5660300002)(26005)(66066001)(256004)(14444005)(5024004)(7736002)(73956011)(6246003)(66946007)(76116006)(71190400001)(11346002)(71200400001)(53936002)(66616009)(53546011)(446003); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:BYAPR11MB2744; H:BYAPR11MB2631.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: cisco.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: OElNkZZdIWqm9TmP8KcR3RNEbH3fGw+nDgWOEXGXOwlNKAFo+Idg+q2EfCz83Xbge3eP6QuKyJHIvLOcPZ3Qcgq2nU71Z9HniLlSbQ1zmmzqCMpckiOqKc7LxyC9ZOwUSlBj58eGtXazteP6ifgLggMKrT4TZ/LDtQ/yNcI9SPbYCSjCe+9Lkm2MO/xVOBUhBGCZsekWQsN02Ao+CDVvj0QZqPig3ZR2grCPzEzn5PiX4UewygfCzwQGlmFchbXzgswouWFahTSzJcd5tUx3eAgdvE8UbI3j7I9E+lBwkPZWviXEB3H8DPjwP39Ca9A6B1dM1GRuhtUv5gtL273AdPTBmPWqV2k1pjwVGTN0WbQctGyk+oPVZ5kssVQze5zX2Ide9Ehe5QjDqqkwqhZJyQgZu0PYZx4ULKcBg6qmYwg=
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="_002_BYAPR11MB263149C35B211A8D19356F18B5150BYAPR11MB2631namp_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 1c65668f-b531-4033-ac69-08d6e8cd2c2f
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 04 Jun 2019 09:15:22.5036 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: rwilton@cisco.com
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BYAPR11MB2744
X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.36.7.13, xch-aln-003.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: alln-core-12.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod-ver-dt/7KLIVNgyBVBBzF1IK2SSwCzlve4>
Subject: Re: [Netmod-ver-dt] Update & today's DT meeting
X-BeenThere: netmod-ver-dt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: NetMod WG YANG Model Versioning Design Team <netmod-ver-dt.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netmod-ver-dt>, <mailto:netmod-ver-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netmod-ver-dt/>
List-Post: <mailto:netmod-ver-dt@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netmod-ver-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod-ver-dt>, <mailto:netmod-ver-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2019 09:15:35 -0000
Hi Balazs, Thanks for the review comments. I think that I have applied most of these comments. Updated version of the draft is attached. > -----Original Message----- > From: Netmod-ver-dt <netmod-ver-dt-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Balázs > Lengyel > Sent: 09 May 2019 17:08 > To: netmod-ver-dt@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Netmod-ver-dt] Update & today's DT meeting > > Hello, > > First of all thanks for your work on the text. Some comments: > > 1) > > I propose to add after para 2: > > The need for NBC changes is present both in standard and vendor modules. [RW] I've reworked the paragraph to include this. > However the as vendor modules often serve in a more controlled and > constrained environment the risks of harming client is often lower and as > a consequence the benefits of accepting NBC changes may be greater. [RW] As agreed, I've not added this. > > 1.1.1) > > I do not understand what this means: > "ensure that does not adversely impact when (parts of) a revised > standards based YANG module update solution is available." > > I would remove the last paragraphs describing what the next chapters will > contain. I also dislike that the topic is now partly in 1.1.1 but also > continued in 1.1.2 and 1.1.3 . [RW] I've removed this text and simplified the sub-section of the document about updates to existing standards. > > 2) > > I don't remember in 7950 where this is stated. Some people may have > assumed this, but it is not written and at least we never believed it: > "it is prohibited to have two > independent revisions of a YANG module that are both derived from the > same parent revision." [RW] Changed "this document updates" to "this document updates and clarifies 7950" > > 2.1) All this is already stated in section 2). Remove or merge. > > 2.1.1) > > s/ to 'obsolete' is not classified as a backwards-compatible/is > classified as a non-backwards-compatible/ [RW] Yes, fix this. > > Move the first para into 2.1.2 as it speaks about an NBC change [RW] Yes, but also move text updating chap 11 to section 2.1. . > > 2.1.2) > > Para 2,3 are somewhat complicated. Why not make it more simple e.g. > > Non-backwards-compatible changes are allowed. > > If a new module revision contains non-backwards-compatible changes, the > revision statement MUST include ... > > 5) Reword to: > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > Instance data sets [I-D.ietf-netmod-yang-instance-file-format] do not > use the nbc-changes extension or anything similar, as compatibility for > instance data > is undefined. > > Instance data specifies the content-schema of the data-set. This schema > should make use of versioning using revision dates and/or revision labels > for the individual YANG modules or potentially for the entire schema > itself (e.g., [I-D.rwilton-netmod-yang-packages]). > > In this way, the versioning of the content-schema of the instance > data set, may help a client to determine whether the instance data > could also be used in conjunction with other revisions of the YANG > schema, or other revisions of the modules that define the schema. > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > IMHO the last paragraph about up/downgrade is out of scope for instance > data, fully implementation specific, it is better to not mention it. > (although the problem is real and interesting) [RW] I've taken your text, tweaked it very slightly, and deleted the last paragraph. > > 6.1) > > Add : It benefits clients if they are notified ahead of time about NBC > changes. Before removing or obsoleting a schema node it SHOULD be in > deprecated status for a period of time unless the schema node is directly > replaced with another new alternative schema node. [RW] I will defer this comment for the moment. I think that we need to look at what is already in the YANG author guidelines and avoid repeating it here. > > > 7) > > Why exclude space from label-string? > Should not start with @ as that's the separator to the filename? [RW] Label must not start (or include?) '@'. > > nbc-changes > The statement MUST only be a substatement to the revision > statement. > Parent MUST have zero or one nbc-changes statement. > NO substatements are allowed. > > label > same as above > [RW] I've reworked all of the constraints (using MAY rather than MUST). > > status description > use all 3 point as in the text or none (replacing node, reason for status- > change, potential date of removal) [RW] I've turned it into an example and included the first two reasons as examples. Thanks, Rob > > regards Balazs >
- [Netmod-ver-dt] Update & today's DT meeting Rob Wilton (rwilton)
- Re: [Netmod-ver-dt] Update & today's DT meeting Rob Wilton (rwilton)
- Re: [Netmod-ver-dt] Update & today's DT meeting Balázs Lengyel
- Re: [Netmod-ver-dt] Update & today's DT meeting Rob Wilton (rwilton)