Re: [netmod] [Netconf] Retrieving Information Pointed by leafref

[Robert Wilton <[e-mail]>]

I'm not sure that my XPath foo is good enough, but would NETCONF's XPath 
filter solve this problem?

Thanks,
Rob


On 09/10/2017 14:42, Xufeng Liu wrote:
>
> Hi Per,
>
> *From:* Igor Bryskin [mailto:[e-mail]]
> *Sent:* Sunday, October 8, 2017 7:04 PM
> *To:* Igor Bryskin <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; 
> [e-mail]
> *Cc:* [e-mail]; [e-mail]
> *Subject:* Re: [Netconf] [netmod] Retrieving Information Pointed by 
> leafref
>
>
> Hi Joel,
>
> Thanks, I think I didnt explain our problem correctly.
>
> In our case we have a leafref pointing to a te tunnel name, which 
> happens to be a key to lookup the (axilary) tunnel.  We need  a way to 
> include the entire tunnel body (not just a name) into the get 
> response. This is to optimize the number of iterations between the 
> client and the server. As Xufeng put it something similar to SQL join,
>
> Igor
>
> *From:*Igor Bryskin
>
> *To:*[e-mail],[e-mail],
>
> *Cc:*[e-mail],[e-mail],
>
> *Date:*2017-10-08 17:36:47
>
> *Subject:*Re: [Netconf] [netmod] Retrieving Information Pointed by leafref
>
> Hi Per,
>
> In a nutshell we would lika for a netconf client to have a way  to 
> instruct the server on whether in response to the get request the 
> server needs to provide the entire body of a datastore node pointed to 
> by a leafref or just a pointer to said node, so that the node's body 
> could be retrieved by a subsequent separate request. This is requested 
> by implementors who want to optimise rhe number of interactions 
> between a client and its server.
>
> Cheers,
> Igor
>
> *From:*Per Hedeland
>
> *To:*Xufeng Liu,
>
> *Cc:*[e-mail],'NetMod WG',
>
> *Date:*2017-10-08 14:01:27
>
> *Subject:*Re: [Netconf] [netmod] Retrieving Information Pointed by leafref
>
> On 2017-10-06 23:11, Xufeng Liu wrote:
> > During the design team discussion for TE and MPLS YANG modeling, we 
> have received a request from implementers: How to minimize the number 
> of NETCONF/RESTCONF RPCs to improve operation efficiency?
> > Especially for the case when the operator or client software needs 
> to retrieve the object contents pointed by a leafref.
> >
> > For example, given the following simplified TE tunnel model,
> >
> > +--rw te
> >
> >      +--rw explicit-paths
> >
> >      |  +--rw explicit-path* [name]
> >
> >      |     +--rw name                      string
> >
> >      |        +--rw explicit-route-object* [index]
> >
> >      |           +--rw index uint32
> >
> >      |           +--rw explicit-route-usage? identityref
> >
> >      +--rw tunnels
> >
> >      |  +--rw tunnel* [name]
> >
> >      |  |  +--rw name                   string
> >
> >      |  |  +--rw paths
> >
> >      |  |  |  +--rw path* [name]
> >
> > |  |  |     +--rw explicit-path?  -> 
> ../../../../../explicit-paths/explicit-path/name
> >
> > when the client tries to retrieve a tunnels information based on the 
> tunnel name, the get operation returns a list of leafrefs pointing to 
> the paths of the tunnel.
>
> Sorry, I'm afraid I don't follow. Can you explain exactly what your
> "get" request is (protocol and payload), and where the "list of
> leafref's" (whatever that may be) occurs in the reply?
>
> */[Xufeng]  The “get” operation is the NETCONF/RESTCON <get> protocol 
> operation, or the <get-data> operation described in 
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dsdt-nmda-netconf-01 and the GET 
> operations on {+restconf}/ds/<datastore> described in 
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netconf-nmda-restconf-00./*
>
> *//*
>
> */We have a list of leafref values because in this example model, each 
> tunnel contains a list of paths, each of them contains a leafref. The 
> “get” returns a value for each instance of such a leafref, which (as a 
> string value) will be used as a constraint (foreign key) to retrieve 
> the instance of an explicit-path in the model above./*
>
>
>
> JFYI, in case there is some fundamental misunderstanding here: a leaf of
> type leafref has a single value - *one* of those that satisfy the leafref
> constraint, in case there are multiple "candidates".
>
> --Per
>
> > The client needs to issue at
> > least one more get operation to retrieve the path information about 
> the given tunnel. The request is to combine these two operations into one.
> >
> > In the RDBMS SQL world, join can be used when SQL select is 
> performed, but NETCONF/YANG currently does not have this capability.
> >
> > Wed like to ask whether such a request is considered reasonable.
> >
> > If the request is reasonable, the next question is how to proceed. 
> This seems to be a protocol issue rather than YANG modeling issue. Is 
> it acceptable to add a new operation to achieve such a
> > <get-data> operation with expanded leafrefs?
> >
> > Comments and suggestions are appreciated.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > - Xufeng
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > netmod mailing list
> > [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Netconf mailing list
> [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod