Re: [netmod] [Netconf] LC on YANG Library (bis)

Robert Wilton <rwilton@cisco.com> Fri, 16 February 2018 16:04 UTC

Return-Path: <rwilton@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BD6C126579; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 08:04:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.511
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.511 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, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, 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
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 gyGw2BiFgfxR; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 08:04:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from aer-iport-3.cisco.com (aer-iport-3.cisco.com [173.38.203.53]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 57092120454; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 08:04:12 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=5566; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1518797052; x=1520006652; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:mime-version: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=JmdvFMn6xGNrskL/oO9zCwwl23ZAY8RJPYpQL27Gu7w=; b=I/znh6jAFr1EysQxr3ApXt5FDGiEtke+OiBlEyp2Vu0mdJCAt/7MCWUU yP7lHcsic5EknUtGaRjhIYZwSDEW2JocKlldRQU0HhdSiEt1SrbAj/4Vz ysIY28okbm0jB80j+JgpIwLm7UBk4pYsT7WGSh5hMONhKkrE/G5lWYPs6 Q=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0CjAAAvAIda/xbLJq1cGQEBAQEBAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEBAQcBAQEBAYQ1cCiDVIoldI5rJ4EXlkmCFgoYC4RJTwKDGhgBAgEBAQEBAQJ?= =?us-ascii?q?rKIUjAQEBAQIBAQEhDwEFNhsLDgoCAiMDAgInHxEGAQwGAgEBihUIEK1EgieFA?= =?us-ascii?q?YN6ghMBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARkFgQ+DeIN/ghEMgnmDMAEBAYFQAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?Igy2CZQWkNQmWCgKCHoYqg3Mmh2WQBYgagTwfOYFRMxoIGxU6gkOEdkE3AYtng?= =?us-ascii?q?j4BAQE?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.46,519,1511827200"; d="scan'208";a="2063962"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-4.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Feb 2018 16:04:08 +0000
Received: from [10.63.23.94] (dhcp-ensft1-uk-vla370-10-63-23-94.cisco.com [10.63.23.94]) by aer-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w1GG48XV022593; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 16:04:08 GMT
To: Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net>, Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com>, NETCONF WG <netconf@ietf.org>, NETMOD WG <netmod@ietf.org>
References: <F10CE657-FC6B-491B-A8DF-0CFEE98B863C@gmail.com> <4a6b7077-a721-6d09-b594-44f9760e58a1@cisco.com> <14390982-A1C2-40E5-AEA1-B03B02E8ACEC@juniper.net> <3d3d9e35-b9f5-aefb-a291-a25549ed9ad5@cisco.com> <87y3jtjob5.fsf@nic.cz> <11a7c859-6d8c-2f67-9918-b3aa5cc77dfa@cisco.com> <87po55ne3j.fsf@nic.cz>
From: Robert Wilton <rwilton@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <98935845-4f6d-230a-9aba-7eff7ed0cef4@cisco.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2018 16:04:08 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <87po55ne3j.fsf@nic.cz>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/-eTEweB27gJxqmyNkCmaaeGNhSc>
Subject: Re: [netmod] [Netconf] LC on YANG Library (bis)
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETMOD WG list <netmod.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netmod/>
List-Post: <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2018 16:04:15 -0000


On 16/02/2018 15:33, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> Robert Wilton <rwilton@cisco.com> writes:
>
>> Hi Lada,
>>
>>
>> On 16/02/2018 09:06, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>>> Robert Wilton <rwilton@cisco.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> I should add, as a contributor, I have read this document and think that
>>>> is ready for advancement.
>>>>
>>>> I have three minor comments:
>>>>
>>>> 1) module "feature" in YANG library is a leaf-list, but currently it is
>>>> a list in YANG libary bis. I suspect that this is due to one of the
>>>> incarnations when it contained additional information.  I think that we
>>>> should revert it back to being a leaf list for consistency.
>>>>
>>>> 2) Lada recommended that module "deviation" be made a leaf-list. I also
>>>> support changing this for consistency with "feature" above, but don't
>>>> feel too strongly on this one.
>>> I agree to have both as leaf-lists.
>>>
>>>> 3) I think the "modules" list is also allowed to included modules that
>>>> don't actually contain any nodes that require implementation.  Hence, it
>>>> might be useful of the "modules" description statement explicitly stated
>>>> this.  I.e. perhaps something like:
>>>>
>>>> "This list may contain modules that do not contain any schema nodes that
>>>> require implementation.  For example, it could contain a module that
>>>> only defines types and not any data nodes, RPCs, actions, notifications,
>>>> or deviations."
>>> Hmm, such modules belong to the other list "import-only-modules", don't
>>> they?
>> So my reasoning is that either is valid.
>>
>> I.e. a module being listed under "modules" means that it implements all
>> data nodes, RPCs, actions, notifications, deviations, etc.  If a module
>> doesn't contain any data nodes, RPCs, actions, notifications,
>> deviations, etc then it is trivially implemented :-)
> OK, so if a module contains only groupings and typedefs, it can appear
> either in "modules" or in "import-only-modules", and the effect is the
> same, right?
Yes.

>
> This sounds reasonable.
>
>> As an aside, RFC 7950 states in 5.6.5:
>>
>>    A server implements a module if it implements the module's data
>>      nodes, RPCs, actions, notifications, and deviations.
>>
>>
>> I wonder whether identities shouldn't also be on this list, since
>> section 9.10.2 states:
> Yes, and extensions as well.
>
> Lada
Thanks,
Rob

>
>> On a particular server, the valid values are further restricted
>> to the set of identities defined in the modules implemented by the server.
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Rob
>>
>>
>>> Lada
>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Rob
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 02/02/2018 13:51, Kent Watsen wrote:
>>>>> As co-author, I am not aware of any IPR related to this document.
>>>>>
>>>>> As a contributor, I have read this document and think that it is ready
>>>>> for advancement.
>>>>>
>>>>> Kent
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2/2/18, 4:30 AM, "Netconf on behalf of Robert Wilton"
>>>>> <netconf-bounces@ietf.org <mailto:netconf-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf
>>>>> of rwilton@cisco.com <mailto:rwilton@cisco.com>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I am not aware of any IPR related to this document.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Rob
>>>>>
>>>>> On 01/02/2018 18:59, Mahesh Jethanandani wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>       WG,
>>>>>
>>>>>       The authors of rfc7895bis have indicated that they believe the
>>>>>       document is ready for LC[1].
>>>>>
>>>>>       This starts a two week LC on the draft
>>>>>       <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__tools.ietf.org_html_draft-2Dietf-2Dnetconf-2Drfc7895bis-2D04&d=DwMD-g&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=9zkP0xnJUvZGJ9EPoOH7Yhqn2gsBYaGTvjISlaJdcZo&m=fi_opjj4kio7eufRXSQSi8dSjJNlkVDo8a1F0zsCrfE&s=MqbVljnYqIk9w78kcfp7oUqGR-qVoNV90njyTwLAdpc&e=>.
>>>>>       The LC will end on February 15.
>>>>>
>>>>>       Please send your comments on this thread. Reviews of the document,
>>>>>       and statement of support are particularly helpful to the authors.
>>>>>       If you have concerns about the document, please state those too.
>>>>>
>>>>>       Authors please indicate if you are aware of any IPR on the document.
>>>>>
>>>>>       Thanks.
>>>>>
>>>>>       [1]
>>>>>       https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netconf/current/msg13980.html
>>>>>       <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mail-2Darchive_web_netconf_current_msg13980.html&d=DwMD-g&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=9zkP0xnJUvZGJ9EPoOH7Yhqn2gsBYaGTvjISlaJdcZo&m=fi_opjj4kio7eufRXSQSi8dSjJNlkVDo8a1F0zsCrfE&s=XhRSSTWifO-SkPi2CWK5Z5aUni2F1qRQ8Moj7T7gI-Y&e=>
>>>>>
>>>>>       Mahesh & Kent
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>       _______________________________________________
>>>>>
>>>>>       Netconf mailing list
>>>>>
>>>>>       Netconf@ietf.org <mailto:Netconf@ietf.org>
>>>>>
>>>>>       https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf
>>>>>       <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_netconf&d=DwMD-g&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=9zkP0xnJUvZGJ9EPoOH7Yhqn2gsBYaGTvjISlaJdcZo&m=fi_opjj4kio7eufRXSQSi8dSjJNlkVDo8a1F0zsCrfE&s=mcDF-v5I4epgsuWLHvr32pZ5mRonROKN8zpKcZWBC0o&e=>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Netconf mailing list
>>>> Netconf@ietf.org
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf
>> _______________________________________________
>> Netconf mailing list
>> Netconf@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf