Re: [Netmod-ver-dt] Solution overview draft, delete duplicate requirements
"Joe Clarke (jclarke)" <jclarke@cisco.com> Thu, 12 September 2019 13:52 UTC
Return-Path: <jclarke@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 ACD9F120041 for <netmod-ver-dt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 06:52:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.499
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.499 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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=ZTYNBquK; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=chbHyP4n
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 emZ2bGHgKmhn for <netmod-ver-dt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 06:52:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.86.76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BFACA1200F6 for <netmod-ver-dt@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 06:52:39 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=41155; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1568296359; x=1569505959; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=hLsMwP923WT+35vhMy9ItKtxGGaeKLnxTa2qaVo4k7Q=; b=ZTYNBquKAd+SxSsBBencLd0TQw/XnGEgLW/3kj4SI49nL9Wzf2dcGuzL DSkNblRoPEpEwxfB4pihJq6Qfpn5qLs4zA1rxjzGC1uLkbje8U6pW2gYx /mr7ekAJg5IB61xRPI6voVEgDlnfSzdSg3bf8w4VhekiKQiNGb/v8Ylb2 Y=;
IronPort-PHdr: 9a23:fLyWHRdeTf9Ff80v4HgLflcGlGMj4e+mNxMJ6pchl7NFe7ii+JKnJkHE+PFxlwGRD57D5adCjOzb++D7VGoM7IzJkUhKcYcEFnpnwd4TgxRmBceEDUPhK/u/bSc+Fd5BWXdu/mqwNg5eH8OtL1A=
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0CoAACETHpd/4ENJK1mHAEBAQQBAQcEAQGBVQUBAQsBgRUvUANtViAECxYUCoQXg0cDimmaTIEugSQDUAQJAQEBDAEBGAEKCgIBAYN6RQIXgkUjNgcOAgMJAQEEAQEBAgEGBG2FLgyFSwIBAwEBEBEdAQEsCwEPAgEIOAEGAwICAiULFBEBAQQOBRsHgwABgR1NAx0BAgyfOgKBOIhhc4Eygn0BAQWCR4I+GIIWAwaBNAGLdxiBQD+BEScfgh4uPoJhAQGCDoJeMoImjFw0gjCFIYkYjlIKgiGHAY12G5kKlgOQagIEAgQFAg4BAQWBWQcqgVhwFTsqAYJBgkKDcoUUhT9zgSmNXAGBIgEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.64,497,1559520000"; d="scan'208,217";a="409478595"
Received: from alln-core-9.cisco.com ([173.36.13.129]) by rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 12 Sep 2019 13:52:38 +0000
Received: from xch-rcd-011.cisco.com (xch-rcd-011.cisco.com [173.37.102.21]) by alln-core-9.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x8CDqc2J023728 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for <netmod-ver-dt@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 13:52:38 GMT
Received: from xhs-rtp-002.cisco.com (64.101.210.229) by XCH-RCD-011.cisco.com (173.37.102.21) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 08:52:38 -0500
Received: from xhs-aln-003.cisco.com (173.37.135.120) by xhs-rtp-002.cisco.com (64.101.210.229) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 09:52:31 -0400
Received: from NAM03-CO1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (173.37.151.57) by xhs-aln-003.cisco.com (173.37.135.120) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 08:52:31 -0500
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=Gn51vfNXhGIvcxTi4HZWD5NHu6jEDaftuA0M6zNRPjOwU6+dWF/rT4phL4S4pED//KyD9hBEHfD4J8KBPMPQBCa26++ogLDy4FK4aGkwxjyxlnZVsZHV/3iG9/Jsj2dxGJkhNcdT6Pic19HlDXzMqnwNYiqGLaDcehexkjTiOC6eCdmqySRl1wWHcA5NYLoTQuZzyITmti5Ebx5puk0Upy/3JvIV44OKAhs5RZnz1AIF1wbw2TVDZPWGCyJ9XAXG8BBWpJ8bYxlIv2RJmcyVYewk5m5hFT+JJJvb0OroKlBlN35cwze2wF4IS12/SD4v38CFADfh7qhBYbR1iFVpNA==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=hLsMwP923WT+35vhMy9ItKtxGGaeKLnxTa2qaVo4k7Q=; b=O9Kef4WDtLDrsFBgaD0np2fmEXp5BFj1DWMffgZ5mSoiW3QjvRieUdoxal5DLejCWeocAtEft5h+CC0wkf79YNjPxKJtFT10aLL9LqdlpV7bj6ZE2kMQcgS91B5FlITkovvntvaGTECXGECyxR+4ZD/PhTgEl0TAQ4ptSrsfI2QWukBdm7bX0C7tNaM8TZKpj/70gcyjqgPK2l3TPS/+4qx6TWDuAKjfbiFOgzex/wYDFNGJOav9xZrYS9kTAGE3sY5atYpd6CBSw46dRewWpCD1yhSKK4JOM+y8SugrELXrC6hLnv84B2ZuOAMbHHJpJx8gkwW1++UlHAaK0hJfwQ==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cisco.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=cisco.com; dkim=pass header.d=cisco.com; arc=none
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=hLsMwP923WT+35vhMy9ItKtxGGaeKLnxTa2qaVo4k7Q=; b=chbHyP4nT+kDt0zXqYO3eQCUbazbHSo14iFNH3ha2cK6pTUmkzsrHbyC1U36kJJxrhlpajcMiBSSduExFjMG02eXYboMTSatQXbFOJqi/HQp+PLjTmNukOrwF5djSiOUbKDbM0/Fh7vpZAuex/yF2B2pBVdLqAS6uo/VVXcG1ms=
Received: from DM6PR11MB3418.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (20.177.219.223) by DM6PR11MB4089.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (20.176.126.30) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2263.13; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 13:52:30 +0000
Received: from DM6PR11MB3418.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::ddcd:cbad:9978:4c68]) by DM6PR11MB3418.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::ddcd:cbad:9978:4c68%5]) with mapi id 15.20.2241.022; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 13:52:30 +0000
From: "Joe Clarke (jclarke)" <jclarke@cisco.com>
To: "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" <rwilton@cisco.com>
CC: "netmod-ver-dt@ietf.org" <netmod-ver-dt@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Netmod-ver-dt] Solution overview draft, delete duplicate requirements
Thread-Index: AdVpWhVkJ54G/fLiTbKZReFEmPXTUwAFzuyA
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2019 13:52:30 +0000
Message-ID: <9FB43DBB-E3AC-4CF4-9F1A-7173C44CB047@cisco.com>
References: <MN2PR11MB4366EF1C65517735C3439B52B5B00@MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <MN2PR11MB4366EF1C65517735C3439B52B5B00@MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=jclarke@cisco.com;
x-originating-ip: [70.231.19.155]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: f2232bf4-cb07-43bc-86c3-08d73788743d
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(5600166)(711020)(4605104)(1401327)(2017052603328)(7193020); SRVR:DM6PR11MB4089;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: DM6PR11MB4089:
x-ms-exchange-purlcount: 2
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <DM6PR11MB4089E8CED9F0203C31A8A32AB8B00@DM6PR11MB4089.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000;
x-forefront-prvs: 01583E185C
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(4636009)(376002)(136003)(346002)(396003)(366004)(39860400002)(51444003)(199004)(189003)(2906002)(66574012)(606006)(6436002)(6862004)(8676002)(8936002)(7736002)(81166006)(66066001)(36756003)(33656002)(54896002)(6306002)(236005)(6512007)(81156014)(14454004)(6246003)(71190400001)(14444005)(966005)(256004)(71200400001)(53936002)(6636002)(102836004)(186003)(6506007)(6486002)(99286004)(76176011)(11346002)(316002)(37006003)(229853002)(446003)(486006)(53546011)(26005)(476003)(2616005)(5660300002)(66476007)(64756008)(66556008)(3846002)(6116002)(66946007)(91956017)(76116006)(478600001)(25786009)(86362001)(4326008)(66446008); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:DM6PR11MB4089; H:DM6PR11MB3418.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX: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: VJiUO1uoYALElAPtQ6ggwgPARvtd5N6eUqse/eKWRaWbiBDESIBLQg0vGOxPgl/wBQtNNbdlmBqCu6vGTZL2jpBr0wv3fKdX04TsY/mg5mBBJ8KA45BdxXQNxKN5lBO/8lcufMvr5ZvgZTgHWZzEM8L6mLOHE/jkCjbp2tlw5ByOxsQc+Y8/380d3gq8DJz5pFJ4tEvJLc/7VZtBJMB/gEqrTgwPKg60tqFFcKzSkxwIlueio8KavjLp9PEamrq7uKHyxlmVUIfTAXitEeEmWVXBbKXUJlSIvmWnkC1GaTkCJKd++rvJx9whGcPJYI4o9QeNjwZSwpsXnTIIFN2nUBxOxvnHXpawtRcCtbrOAHNc5rPUDNwTs+btGVZwDDSU5IHhE8J1t/IhUWPt0DinTh1iuGf4HudjYxYTbDx/EiI=
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_9FB43DBBE3AC4CF49F1A7173C44CB047ciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: f2232bf4-cb07-43bc-86c3-08d73788743d
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 12 Sep 2019 13:52:30.0514 (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: JcPWXksk0OKvJqi1uHw5Vd8bTFne6saHXYOzr9D1lrdcr2CnjBN83rX4WHB40fLvSz949kYsurgGaBdXYraaGg==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM6PR11MB4089
X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.37.102.21, xch-rcd-011.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: alln-core-9.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod-ver-dt/Aii96QSYKybHxwkpxQBrBvBF1BM>
Subject: Re: [Netmod-ver-dt] Solution overview draft, delete duplicate requirements
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: Thu, 12 Sep 2019 13:52:43 -0000
On Sep 12, 2019, at 07:06, Rob Wilton (rwilton) <rwilton@cisco.com<mailto:rwilton@cisco.com>> wrote: One item of feedback received from the mic was to not list the requirements in two places. Currently, the solution overview draft has the following text. I’m proposing that I just remove the section 2 (which is a rewording of the requirements), since the introduction already references the requirements. Any objections? Nope. I think that is exactly what Lou was requesting. You already have a reference to the reqs. Joe Thanks, Rob 1. Introduction TODO - Fixup references to individual drafts. [I-D.ietf-netmod-yang-versioning-reqs] documents the requirements for any solution to the YANG versioning problem. Chapter 5 lists the formal requirements that a complete solution requires. The aim of this draft is to help readers understand how the different solution drafts fit together, and also which drafts contribute solutions to particular individual requirements. The overall solution comprises five individual drafts: 1. Module revision extensions 2. Module semantic version number scheme 3. [I-D.rwilton-netmod-yang-packages] 4. [I-D.wilton-netmod-yang-ver-selection] 5. YANG schema comparison tooling (not yet published) Open issues, across all of the solution drafts are tracked at <https://github.com/netmod-wg/yang-ver-dt/issues>. Wilton Expires December 2, 2019 [Page 2] Internet-Draft YANG Versioning Solution Overview May 2019 2. Summary of requirements The requirements are formally documented in section 5 of [I-D.ietf-netmod-yang-versioning-reqs]. A shortened, non normative, summary of each of the requirements (using the same requirement numbers) is provided below to help understand how the solutions drafts address the particular requirements. Req 1.1 - MUST allow nbc updates to a module without breaking imports. Req 1.2 - MUST allow nbc updates to a module without affecting existing client code using only unchanged data nodes. Req 1.3 - MUST support import statement restricted to only some revisions. Req 1.4 - MUST allow for fixes to non-latest published modules. Req 2.1 - MUST be able to determine if two arbitrary versions of any module are backwards-compatible. Req 2.2 - SHOULD be able to determine if two arbitrary versions of any data node are backwards-compatible. Req 3.1 - MUST allow servers to support existing clients. Req 3.2 - MUST allow simultaneously support of clients using different (perhaps restricted) revisions. Req 3.3 - MAY assume clients can handle unexpected instance data gracefully. Req 4.1 - MUST provide a way to indicate if deprecated nodes are implemented. Req 4.2 - MUST be able to document the reason for data node lifecycle changes, and possible alternative data nodes. Req 4.3 - MUST be able to forewarn of future data node lifecycle changes. Req 5.1 - MUST provide guidance on how to use the new scheme. Req 5.2 - MUST provide, and document, an upgrade path from existing YANG/protocols. Req 5.3 - MUST consider the impact of versioning on instance data. _______________________________________________ Netmod-ver-dt mailing list Netmod-ver-dt@ietf.org<mailto:Netmod-ver-dt@ietf.org> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod-ver-dt
- [Netmod-ver-dt] Solution overview draft, delete d… Rob Wilton (rwilton)
- Re: [Netmod-ver-dt] Solution overview draft, dele… Joe Clarke (jclarke)