Re: [Netmod-ver-dt] YANG packages - ready to post?

"Joe Clarke (jclarke)" <jclarke@cisco.com> Wed, 23 October 2019 19:36 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 94888120D8B for <netmod-ver-dt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 12:36:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.5
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.5 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, 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=H/Xbh0sI; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=K1U++vAt
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 gBrYepVzmtOh for <netmod-ver-dt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 12:36:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-2.cisco.com (alln-iport-2.cisco.com [173.37.142.89]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 79091120D85 for <netmod-ver-dt@ietf.org>; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 12:36:25 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=5838; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1571859385; x=1573068985; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=MIRSsdL+PecgoErRaNc6fT8NUt3KchH8MnQG1kauf0Y=; b=H/Xbh0sIHSIZO5RGhg3G7BRyyO/7nTKhcRl2v4I5Wrn9zq7xdkfyAM7v YnSHwoAoWJi9zapj0cAZFImzS3Jblxz4SM+61xl6R2c9blWZU/AsQpeqa vb2yAUgMggK49h2aknuZIgjmmNkUpqMO972hAc1cSPqxKRKbTqlBpBNIs E=;
IronPort-PHdr: 9a23:W4UAFheZqLe5MZzNueGWpVVelGMj4e+mNxMJ6pchl7NFe7ii+JKnJkHE+PFxlwGRD57D5adCjOzb++D7VGoM7IzJkUhKcYcEFnpnwd4TgxRmBceEDUPhK/u/bSc+Fd5BWXdu/mqwNg5eH8OtL1A=
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0AJAACLqrBd/5xdJa1lGgEBAQEBAQEBAQMBAQEBEQEBAQICAQEBAYFnBQEBAQELAYFKKScFbFcgBAsWFIQng0cDhFiGA4I5JZgDgS6BJANUCQEBAQwBARgNCAIBAYN7RQIXgx0kNAkOAgMJAQEEAQEBAgEFBG2FNwyFUAEBAQECAQEBEBERDAEBLAsBBAcEAgEIEQMBAQEBAgImAgICJQsVCAgCBAoEBRsHgwABgkYDDiABDqgdAoE4iGF1gTKCfgEBBYE0AYEUgkMYghcDBoEOKAGMDhiBQD+BEScME4IeLj6CYgEBgUsWF4J5MoIsjQ8DgmadawqCJIcOjhkbgjuHVI9BhDqSI5EhAgQCBAUCDgEBBYFSOYFYcBU7KgGCQVAQFIMGgScBCIJDhRSFP3QBCYEfjyQBAQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.68,222,1569283200"; d="scan'208";a="356901411"
Received: from rcdn-core-5.cisco.com ([173.37.93.156]) by alln-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 23 Oct 2019 19:36:24 +0000
Received: from xch-rcd-011.cisco.com (xch-rcd-011.cisco.com [173.37.102.21]) by rcdn-core-5.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x9NJaOlt011049 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for <netmod-ver-dt@ietf.org>; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 19:36:24 GMT
Received: from xhs-rcd-003.cisco.com (173.37.227.248) by XCH-RCD-011.cisco.com (173.37.102.21) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 14:36:23 -0500
Received: from xhs-rcd-001.cisco.com (173.37.227.246) by xhs-rcd-003.cisco.com (173.37.227.248) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 14:36:22 -0500
Received: from NAM04-BN3-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (72.163.14.9) by xhs-rcd-001.cisco.com (173.37.227.246) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 14:36:22 -0500
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=Qql8oCiczdpfTWn22VMJZibbO1gdKIbqq+t0Ko/3pVJhm/p5ir4i/p/Kg3cdmekonfRoiFH9I0DgpfWg261GE6mUe0XmyyUOXWLywA/9LMaf2++ftvvSkabaSzr8x44+yMME1BPBfdyG5MRk5/MO5L+WUWkkcLthIbAbKAwt4qEs0acg9Huqn0gmYT5z6U7DQ/hyQb3fVeGJVBgB00FOccurVGa7JGjh9uMFz/nkV/KNE2JOBWqyjCfCOTxLGQMCRYTm+W2lJ4oMVFX6fZyDfFSVFhKW3UKS9ZTu9MyXUErsdse9NFpgKiJOhtLo0B9m66i7b9cFQ3gwYcHnvh4hWA==
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=MIRSsdL+PecgoErRaNc6fT8NUt3KchH8MnQG1kauf0Y=; b=bMYIrl9CyVm2BZ0ErKLe6YVvc8TIMNBtYH98yNedHpZ5SLKXUVt/CUY9nJYKQMquCu8t87G77XF4lWTV7B4CKzLw7qr3trmoAUKWd13UHWyUafoljuqunaE9S21ysvfgzFa2GjiaWRqWHZmC9hWeGJ/aDo2VED9T7a2T5SR0lzDmcK6VSJVICV6v26zUuqKaLW8tkcfayYGeV3IM/Jh/1hoSDIK+mCKUo0OBIisEHgupaI16MgNpKVKEUcb9bX97ErliGDOaAcFynecFmJUq0WR2mYQwlCaCxe6hNVe6SkdwkwrKGUrHcjjtSbT4Lclv2EumzWTbQBwrk1/e3oUyWQ==
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=MIRSsdL+PecgoErRaNc6fT8NUt3KchH8MnQG1kauf0Y=; b=K1U++vAtYLV60C6jD0GtqPCdYv4t6jOtGoChrYnAX2BT2e4UYR9PSwmDDsYnxd6ET9KnvGCuLhC9VUOmnCSaShGKkDxavAWrPQOZgEghKW4sGvk6ZwdDcAaTaQCO+eshqgfh6SebkdR69V6AHYq39dBLEB+uOD97GJQYAFzBZlM=
Received: from BN6PR11MB1667.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (10.172.23.12) by BN6PR11MB1890.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (10.175.101.13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2347.16; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 19:36:21 +0000
Received: from BN6PR11MB1667.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::6591:258d:331a:e2f8]) by BN6PR11MB1667.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::6591:258d:331a:e2f8%9]) with mapi id 15.20.2347.030; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 19:36:21 +0000
From: "Joe Clarke (jclarke)" <jclarke@cisco.com>
To: "Reshad Rahman (rrahman)" <rrahman@cisco.com>
CC: "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" <rwilton@cisco.com>, "netmod-ver-dt@ietf.org" <netmod-ver-dt@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Netmod-ver-dt] YANG packages - ready to post?
Thread-Index: AQHVidfkcwc7guqQcEOnDi4fm3mfYKdonpoA
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2019 19:36:21 +0000
Message-ID: <630ECB06-2145-42D5-8D8D-B40396FC9ECA@cisco.com>
References: <341B2B76-98CE-4F78-84C7-E556250470A6@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <341B2B76-98CE-4F78-84C7-E556250470A6@cisco.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: [2600:1700:b00:b239:7810:5d7d:c42e:c1a6]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 7fe102b5-fb4e-42fa-be81-08d757f0482c
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BN6PR11MB1890:
x-ms-exchange-purlcount: 4
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BN6PR11MB189066F68CB5E8345470374EB86B0@BN6PR11MB1890.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000;
x-forefront-prvs: 019919A9E4
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(4636009)(366004)(376002)(396003)(39860400002)(136003)(346002)(189003)(51444003)(199004)(13464003)(478600001)(2906002)(6506007)(53546011)(5660300002)(186003)(229853002)(102836004)(76176011)(4326008)(54906003)(8936002)(66446008)(25786009)(14454004)(6512007)(66476007)(6306002)(305945005)(76116006)(66946007)(66556008)(7736002)(966005)(46003)(64756008)(37006003)(81166006)(71200400001)(316002)(8676002)(81156014)(256004)(86362001)(6636002)(6436002)(4001150100001)(6246003)(14444005)(2616005)(6862004)(11346002)(446003)(71190400001)(36756003)(6116002)(6486002)(99286004)(33656002)(486006)(476003); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:BN6PR11MB1890; H:BN6PR11MB1667.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: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: DBZQFNngZqOPB/HsIRV5wrVGKzajvC5ziPgKpcBO6ClglJg+4gaiujAqm0KL7wIhkLGAJZUvwnqJ7D8qUvuI78CTHb118KTMVDtzV18BWXEi3gxvVvWL7YpZKMVuLNWlyTTV3yFf91u+lQME+WEiJi6CZBoZ59bzIbVHReg6/3vmHCtbbbjZjkwCajQF2WaKvydE89CVv02SU8T80fvBPdtG0pSkpxgJGr3wRcR2unJjReayNpENPKrEc6/D6OKdE+WqT6QQYNOBXkCBqzcKOYdB+t0Jabb35P0ujY/liGLYjBTY+lYdj7mdbmI3QxOcoXyjIyMDgScQ2rbUBDtpMJVLwGiklft9bEW1XErp/Md6lVNDhNXlfDWEUNPpUAav5gkX4Jgu8pBUbZObKP4O9aBxrdDeBHZkyTCjbMM0M4/+aSLXcy8PmKbzc2T1NqPrLEWnInSM4KwjnNLLYLhn6NpOgJJj9sNcOXgYT17dhcQ=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <307135F7806D7343AEEC9B95F9CB1E11@cisco.onmicrosoft.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 7fe102b5-fb4e-42fa-be81-08d757f0482c
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 23 Oct 2019 19:36:21.0354 (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: wpH4QEW59yxsN8rRULs9u4ik5cny5sIdncdXQRIch7eFBvuL92lttxHOkdC0KwNA3gSrMqkEUK4CAzttx5q1kA==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BN6PR11MB1890
X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.37.102.21, xch-rcd-011.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: rcdn-core-5.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod-ver-dt/R3dh0gXR_S08X24Olz2C89eH3gw>
Subject: Re: [Netmod-ver-dt] YANG packages - ready to post?
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: Wed, 23 Oct 2019 19:36:27 -0000

Agreed.  Good WG questions.  I have opinions on some, but I’m still digesting others.

Joe

PGP Key : https://www.marcuscom.com/pgp.asc

> On Oct 23, 2019, at 15:28, Reshad Rahman (rrahman) <rrahman@cisco.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Rob,
> 
> I took a quick look, nothing major stood out. Ship it....
> 
> Regards,
> Reshad.
> 
> On 2019-10-22, 11:26 AM, "Netmod-ver-dt on behalf of Rob Wilton (rwilton)" <netmod-ver-dt-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of rwilton@cisco.com> wrote:
> 
>    Hi,
> 
>    I think that I have hopefully resolved the main points that came up in review (principally except whether we have different structures for the file vs the device).
> 
>    I think that it would be good to get the current version posted to the WG, but if anyone wants to review/check my markups before I post, please let me know before Thursday's meeting.
> 
>    When I send it to the WG, I intend to also point out some of the open questions that they may want to consider or comment on.  Of course comments on the rest of the draft will also be welcome.
> 
>    The questions are:
> 
> 
>    1) Should packages use different structures for the file vs the device?
> 
>    The current approach aims to optimize for readability in the file and data transfer on the device (by reusing YANG library module-sets).
> 
>    One alternative is to use the same structure on both, with a duplication on module metadata information on the server by not reusing the YANG library module-sets.
> 
> 
>    2) The new version of the packages draft uses SHA-256 checksums on module, sub-module, and included package definitions.  Normally, a SHA-256 checksum is 64 characters long, but we could allow a prefix of the checksum to optionally be used in the files instead (i.e. similarly to how git commit hashes are handled).
> 
> 
>    3) Packages are allowed to use "tags" (from draft-ietf-netmod-module-tags) to add extra metadata to a package.  Currently, the draft doesn't provide any mechanism to add, remove, modify the tags associated with a package on a device.  Should this be added, or can this work reasonably be deferred?
> 
> 
>    4) The package definitions examples don't include/require XML namespaces.  Allowing, but not requiring, these in a package definition seems OK, but I prefer a solution that expects that package and module names to be unique (which, for modules at least, I think that the YANG JSON encoding effectively requires?).
> 
> 
>    5) I presume that we should try and define an IANA registry for package definitions, similar to the IANA YANG module registry.  Arguably, it might be more useful if the registry could be wider than just IETF modules.
> 
> 
>    Thanks,
>    Rob
> 
> 
> 
>    -----Original Message-----
>    From: Netmod-ver-dt <netmod-ver-dt-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Robert Wilton
>    Sent: 22 October 2019 11:07
>    To: netmod-ver-dt@ietf.org
>    Subject: [Netmod-ver-dt] [rgwilton/YANG-Packages-Draft] 72951e: Further markups
> 
>      Branch: refs/heads/master
>      Home:   https://github.com/rgwilton/YANG-Packages-Draft
>      Commit: 72951e88a99d3f412838badf9f9485e368d6ddd5
>          https://github.com/rgwilton/YANG-Packages-Draft/commit/72951e88a99d3f412838badf9f9485e368d6ddd5
>      Author: rwilton <rwilton@cisco.com>
>      Date:   2019-10-22 (Tue, 22 Oct 2019)
> 
>      Changed paths:
>        M draft-rwilton-netmod-yang-packages.txt
>        M draft-rwilton-netmod-yang-packages.xml
>        M ietf-yang-inst-data-pkg.yang
>        M ietf-yang-package-types.yang
>        M ietf-yang-package.yang
>        M ietf-yl-packages.yang
> 
>      Log Message:
>      -----------
>      Further markups
> 
> 
>    _______________________________________________
>    Netmod-ver-dt mailing list
>    Netmod-ver-dt@ietf.org
>    https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod-ver-dt
> 
>    _______________________________________________
>    Netmod-ver-dt mailing list
>    Netmod-ver-dt@ietf.org
>    https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod-ver-dt
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Netmod-ver-dt mailing list
> Netmod-ver-dt@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod-ver-dt