Re: [netmod] Fwd: Re: YANG schema mount

Hi,

I'm not sure if these changes make the doc better.  "how the schema is
mounted" is not just "inline" / "shared-schema", but there is also the
"config" leaf.  And having to repeat that in many places makes the
text a bit clumsy imo.   Maybe others can chime in as well?

/martin

Hayden Brown <Hayden.Brown@Aviatnet.com> wrote:
> Hi Martin,
> 
> Thank you for your comments. Ok, agreed - it would be better to not introduce a new mounted-schema 'type' term. Perhaps the wording "how the schema is mounted" is a better alternative?
> I've provided possible wording suggestions again below in brackets.
>  
> 
> Section 3.3 – Page 7
> The "/schema-mounts" container has the "mount-point" list as one of its children. Every entry of this list refers through its key to a mount point and specifies [how the schema is mounted, as either "inline" or "shared-schema"].
> 
> 
> Section 3.3 - Page 8
> An entry of the "mount-point" list can specify [how the schema is mounted] in two different ways, "inline" or "shared-schema".
> 
> 
> Section 9 - Page 13
> A mount point defines a place in the node hierarchy where other data models may be attached. A server that implements a module with a mount point populates the /schema-mounts/mount-point list with detailed information on [whether the data models mounted at each instance of a mount point MAY be different ("inline" case) or if they MUST all have the same YANG library checksum ("shared-schema" case). ]
> 
> [For a "shared-schema" mount-point list entry, the entry MAY include one or more "parent-reference" list entries that are used to specify the context nodeset for any XPath 1.0 expressions defined within the mounted schema.]
> 
> 
> Section 9 - Page 14
> list mount-point {
>     key "module label";
>     description
>     "Each entry of this list specifies [how the] schema for a particular mount point [is mounted ("inline" or "shared-schema"). ]
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Hayden
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin Bjorklund [mailto:mbj@tail-f.com] 
> Sent: Monday, 6 August 2018 11:06 PM
> To: Hayden Brown
> Cc: netmod@ietf.org
> Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [netmod] Fwd: Re: YANG schema mount - any early implementations?
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Hayden Brown <Hayden.Brown@Aviatnet.com> wrote:
> > Hi Lou,
> > 
> > 
> > Thank you for your response. In the new copy of the sections below I've attempted to convey how I think the paragraphs could read.
> > 
> > 
> > In my mind, the main "point of ambiguity" is that it seemed the existing wording implies:
> > 
> >   *    the mount-point list specifies which modules are mounted below the root of the mount point.
> > 
> > however, I think we have all agreed that:
> > 
> >   *   the mount-point list specifies the parent module that contains the mount-point,.
> > 
> > I see this as just a subtle interpretation difference in the wording "specifies the mounted schema".
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Hopefully the wording (edited in the brackets) below better conveys my thoughts. Please feel free to correct me, or improve the wording below as you see fit.
> > 
> > Section 3.3 – Page 7
> > > The "/schema-mounts" container has the "mount-point" list as one of its children. Every entry of this list refers through its key to a mount point and specifies the [type of] mounted schema [as "inline" or "shared-schema"].
> > 
> > Section 3.3 - Page 8
> > > An entry of the "mount-point" list can specify the [type of] mounted schema in two different ways, "inline" or "shared-schema".
> 
> The document does not define the "type" of a mounted schema, so I
> don't think we should use that term in just a few places.
> 
> > Section 9 - Page 13
> > > A mount point defines a place in the node hierarchy where other data models may be attached. A server that implements a module with a mount point populates the /schema-mounts/mount-point list with detailed information on whether the [data models mounted at each instance of a mount point MAY be different ("inline" case) or MUST all have the same YANG library checksum ("shared-schema" case).
> > 
> > For a "shared-schema" mount-point list entry, the entry MAY include one or more "parent-reference" list entries that are used to specify the context nodeset for any XPath 1.0 expressions defined within the mounted schema.]
> > 
> > 
> > Section 9 - Page 14
> > list mount-point {
> >     key "module label";
> >     description
> >     "Each entry of this list specifies [the type of] schema for a particular mount point [ ("inline" or "shared-schema") ].
> > 
> > 
> > Thanks and best regards,
> > 
> > Hayden
> > 
> 
> 
> /martin
> 
> 
> 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > ________________________________
> > From: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
> > Sent: Friday, 3 August 2018 7:28 a.m.
> > To: Hayden Brown; netmod@ietf.org
> > Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [netmod] Fwd: Re: YANG schema mount - any early implementations?
> > 
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> >     hopefully others will chime in too, but here's my view (as a user of schema mount, see https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-rtgwg-ni-model)...
> > 
> > On 7/30/2018 7:27 PM, Hayden Brown wrote:
> > 
> > Hi everyone,
> > 
> > I just wanted to ask if it would be possible to clarify the intentions around some of the wording of the draft schema mount standard (Rev-10). In particular, regarding entries of the /schema-mounts/mount-points list.
> > 
> > My interpretation is that the intended use of the /schema-mounts/mount-points list entries are to specify the parent modules that contain a mount point.
> > 
> > yes
> > 
> > Following on from this, the client should use the YANG library instance to determine which schema options can be mounted at the root of a mount point. This seems consistent with the examples of Appendix A of the draft standard.
> > 
> > if you drop the word "options", then yes.  Other examples can be found in draft-ietf-rtgwg-ni-model
> > 
> > 
> > In this email I wanted to highlight the following sections of the draft RFC below. In my view they seem to me to be somewhat ambiguous, in implying that the mount-point list entries specify the *child* module (sub-schema):
> > 
> > 
> > >From https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount/?include_text=1
> > Section 3.3 – Page 7
> > > The "/schema-mounts" container has the "mount-point" list as one of its children. Every entry of this list refers through its key to a mount point and specifies the mounted schema.
> > 
> > Section 3.3 - Page 8
> > > An entry of the "mount-point" list can specify the mounted schema in two different ways, "inline" or "shared-schema".
> > 
> > 
> > Section 9 - Page 13
> > > A mount point defines a place in the node hierarchy where other data models may be attached. A server that implements a module with a mount point populates the /schema-mounts/mount-point list with detailed information on which data models are mounted at each mount point.
> > 
> > Section 9 - Page 14
> > list mount-point {
> >     key "module label";
> >     description
> >     "Each entry of this list specifies a schema for a particular mount point.
> > 
> > 
> > I have reread the a few times and am having a hard time understand what should be changed.  Can you suggest specific changes that would address your concern/comment?  This might help to understand the issue you are seeing.
> > 
> > 
> > The wording makes me wonder if these passages might actually just be "left-over" context from earlier revisions of the draft standard (Revision 8 and prior) -- effectively referring back to the schema-mount 'use-schema' list.
> > 
> > Again, I'm seeing the issue.
> > 
> > 
> > I do of course acknowledge that it is entirely possible that I've misinterpreted the wording of the passages above, however if that is the case, I suspect I may not be the only one in future.
> > And I'm sure I'm suffering from having spent way too much time on this topic so may be seeing things in the text that aren't actually there!
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > Lou
> > (no hats)
> > 
> > 
> > Many thanks for your time on this matter.
> > 
> > Best regards,
> > Hayden
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On 20/07/2018 8:09 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
> > 
> > On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 09:43:32AM +1200, hayden wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > I understand that the schema mount proposal is still effectively in a
> > 
> > state of flux, but are there any publicly visible implementations or
> > 
> > deployments of a NETCONF or RESTCONF server that those interested could
> > 
> > experiment with (e.g. to aid in client development)?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > State of flux? It is past WG last call and IETF last call.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount/history/
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > /js
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > netmod mailing list
> > netmod@ietf.org<mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
> > 
> > 
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> netmod@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod