Re: [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults leaf
Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com> Mon, 23 August 2021 16:58 UTC
Return-Path: <andy@yumaworks.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 AAFE63A16D5 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Aug 2021 09:58:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.887
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.887 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=yumaworks-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 fQh_8mP5OI1v for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Aug 2021 09:58:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf1-x131.google.com (mail-lf1-x131.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::131]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 85DD13A16D4 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 Aug 2021 09:58:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf1-x131.google.com with SMTP id g13so39208136lfj.12 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 Aug 2021 09:58:03 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yumaworks-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=aSYggRQnTUQhVnKmCr1QlFUt6OzUOIjrVNo4tsq0xKM=; b=qWG4sZ3b2oHHYRgjOXbwJLyvsMyqLdxYXZLyuFn+FP9EHzyUAo1WABsS+j1aRaMLzL 6xs5tCrq0hBUHc3Dvn+lLw4ZksSzzHbGEPqwZq+hpoukpxhqDZQiU3gg+37FBKJvq8jm tcqdcRy7eR7daF3h9hbneJ3tCvjM/JdcWDr6aDu5twl98Z/amtQSQ+wMqUGgR3sHi1hg m4ef82laRwn0yAGHA9ZRCR5a3AJx3i3QfPnBGrO77IJHibTau0GsPWH0hVWN/6gkg5EF 2MKqiZNAweiUQ1vOYDdQP9sbgPqKa1b028m6ZcVsxJOBo34zOtu86uNllrd11qEzmuPh lPdQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=aSYggRQnTUQhVnKmCr1QlFUt6OzUOIjrVNo4tsq0xKM=; b=AiYyBOe/6z6Awa5GK5eDufbGYR3ophRGLwF90ROLhiojIiOdQ74icaXvkm5LV4ueco nG5lx97bV3UvPOuHB9HjZNOjRV1muaOCadhXeiBDF84cqEOlwolo5TjO9lVgaFeb+h6S A/emo5x2a9ddD+Vf1Z6/78bGaQC0+6oCI0D90IHxETutxW6N+ixRj+EOw6zowksRx+fu wQm6nqQf2XIBLHF8TxWIRRmwAtLqUiMsgDpuyqP7x/2WETi/SsJNg9+hJPFnwgOst/90 Gzh9ZINQlxmvqg3cC0/ZqJTraJvj1rr+kC6t/h9/MzMpzQKPmjzbl/j3jlnpOlsY10xo 3Gew==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532XFLRU7+klqmML71IC4RY6/qNtf/N1GPZNJolkmhSjnfhZdoGt XyfghUU9cpSnOn1C3TNI6NaOzfrFBJzB4wBC8+kcEg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyKS582xwXLxqInbRMLHFwoqIYy6UExDBuZ30TShgpK7CHTMNiD0GfsIUJifcS75PwcewH2QeDudG3uJbkP7Vk=
X-Received: by 2002:a19:4f1a:: with SMTP id d26mr24813836lfb.377.1629737880742; Mon, 23 Aug 2021 09:58:00 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CABCOCHQB8=kAXRejif=04ThzbSn87oqvDLB5=oJ2FVcAKrSg4Q@mail.gmail.com> <DM4PR11MB5438F5874CDEB4D78C9A5695B5189@DM4PR11MB5438.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <CABCOCHRwzRajMmSd2mArLeLr8OOxTdLEid3bEDdVH0vgNysTfg@mail.gmail.com> <DM4PR11MB5438FBF7837C1147D786964CB5E99@DM4PR11MB5438.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <AM8PR07MB8230BEFDC5A967AB6293C794F0EA9@AM8PR07MB8230.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <DM4PR11MB543824EB074422075681CA9AB5C49@DM4PR11MB5438.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <AM8PR07MB82307EB8EBBE614C60DC8D1CF0C49@AM8PR07MB8230.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <AM8PR07MB82307EB8EBBE614C60DC8D1CF0C49@AM8PR07MB8230.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
From: Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2021 09:57:49 -0700
Message-ID: <CABCOCHQG_6qUUn9JzdrjmyiD8AQPsAPJXuLN+d+GfPnbHMpmbw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Balázs Lengyel <balazs.lengyel@ericsson.com>
Cc: "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" <rwilton@cisco.com>, NetMod WG <netmod@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000075827b05ca3ceb9d"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/0CCns7ztpaEN2-UeKWa2o8EwAsQ>
Subject: Re: [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults leaf
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Mon, 23 Aug 2021 16:58:11 -0000
On Mon, Aug 23, 2021 at 5:17 AM Balázs Lengyel <balazs.lengyel@ericsson.com> wrote: > Hello Rob, > > I think this won’t fly. > > In sections 1.2 and 2 we state: > > *“**Instance data files MAY contain partial data sets.”* > > Which is important for many use-cases. This means you cannot say that a default value will or must be included, as they might be omitted because they are not part of the partial data set. > > In a way it is difficult to separate between leaves that are missing because > > - They are not part of the partial data-set > > - They are omitted because they have the default value and one of the trim or explicit options is used > > If this becomes important the report-all options shall be used. > > > > I thought we already agreed there cannot be a default or there is no way to represent "no defaults added". Note that "report-all" is not useful if basic-mode=explicit, since a leaf reporting the YANG default could be set by the client. Only report-all-tagged will clearly identify defaults in this case. Also note that if basic-mode=report-all then there will be no defaults ever reported. This mode means the server does not consider any node to be a default and always returns every node (if with-defaults used or not). > This is the reason I used the SHOULD word. > > Regards Balazs > > Andy > > > *From:* Rob Wilton (rwilton) <rwilton@cisco.com> > *Sent:* 2021. augusztus 23., hétfő 12:27 > *To:* Balázs Lengyel <balazs.lengyel@ericsson.com>; Andy Bierman < > andy@yumaworks.com>; NetMod WG <netmod@ietf.org> > *Subject:* RE: [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults leaf > > > > Hi Balazs, Andy, Netmod, > > > > Sorry for the delayed response. I would still like to strength the > description of the defaults. E.g., RFC 6243 uses MUSTs rather than SHOULDs. > > > > Hence, I have generated some proposed alternative descriptions, that are > somewhat stricter, but also more generically focussed only on the default > values. > > > > With these definitions, I think that we could define the > “include-defaults” default value to be “explicit”, since if the leaf if not > included, then I think that this effectively what the meaning would be > anyway. > > > > > > In particular, I would propose changing the descriptions as follows: > > > > leaf includes-defaults { > > type enumeration { > > enum report-all { > > value 1; > > description > > "All data nodes SHOULD be included independent of > > any default values."; > > } > > enum trim { > > value 2; > > description > > "Data nodes that have a default defined and where > > the actual value is the default value SHOULD > > NOT be included."; > > } > > enum explicit { > > value 3; > > description > > "Data nodes that have a default defined and where > > the actual value is the default value SHOULD NOT be > > included. However, if the actual value was set by > > a NETCONF client or other management application > > by the way of an explicit management operation the > > data node SHOULD be included."; > > } > > } > > > > Proposed: > > > > leaf includes-defaults { > > type enumeration { > > enum report-all { > > value 1; > > description > > "The instance data set includes all data nodes, > > including those that contain the schema default.”; > > } > > enum trim { > > value 2; > > description > > "The instance data set excludes all data nodes > > that contain the schema default."; > > } > > enum explicit { > > value 3; > > description > > "The instance data set may include some data nodes > > that match the schema default and may exclude some > > data nodes that match the schema default.”; > > } > > } > > description > > "This leaf provides an indication of how default data > > is presented within an instance data set, modelled on > > RFC 6243. > > > > Interpretation of the use of defaults depends on the > > context of what the instance data set represents. > > > > E.g., if the instance data set represents configuration, > > Then include-defaults aligns to the meaning of the > > default-handling basic modes in RFC 6243. If the > > instance data set represents operational data from the > > operational state datastore [RFC 8342], then > > include-defaults aligns to the definition of that > > datastore in RFC 8342.”; > > > > Would text along these lines work? > > > > Thanks, > > Rob > > > > > > *From:* Balázs Lengyel <balazs.lengyel@ericsson.com> > *Sent:* 28 July 2021 23:08 > *To:* Rob Wilton (rwilton) <rwilton@cisco.com>; Andy Bierman < > andy@yumaworks.com> > *Cc:* NetMod WG <netmod@ietf.org> > *Subject:* RE: [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults leaf > > > > Hello Rob, > > Removing the “default trim;” will address Andy’s comment. > > > > Your *in-use-values* is very specific to one of the use-cases: > reading/documenting operational values. It is not useful for the other > use-cases. I think the “documenting operational datastore” use-case could > be handled by indicating the *includes-defaults=report-all*. Case (i) > would contain the value case (ii) will not. > > Regards Balazs > > > > *From:* Rob Wilton (rwilton) <rwilton@cisco.com> > *Sent:* 2021. július 27., kedd 17:38 > *To:* Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>; Balázs Lengyel < > balazs.lengyel@ericsson.com> > *Cc:* NetMod WG <netmod@ietf.org> > *Subject:* RE: [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults leaf > > > > Hi Andy, Balazs, > > > > So, the reason that I want a flag to indicate whether default values are > in use is because of this definition of operational in RFC 8342: > > > > Requests to retrieve nodes from <operational> always return the value > > in use if the node exists, regardless of any default value specified > > in the YANG module. If no value is returned for a given node, then > > this implies that the node is not used by the device. > > > > It was written this way because otherwise a consumer of operational data > cannot differentiate between: > > (i) This value is not present because it matches the > default value specified in the YANG module, and > > (ii) This value is not present because the server has failed > to return it for some reason (e.g., perhaps the daemon that would have > provided this value is down or not available, or perhaps it is a bug, or > perhaps it is not implemented and is a missing deviation). > > > > So, I think that in some cases, the absence of a data node does not > necessarily mean that the default value is in effect, and I wanted the > instance-data document to be able to contain and correctly report this data. > > > > I think that this behaviour could be captured by a single leaf. Another > way of articulating this would be: > > > > leaf in-use-values { > > type boolean; > > default false; > > description > > “Only if set to true, the absence of a value in the > > instance data for a given data node implies that the > > node is not used rather than implicitly taking the > > default value specified by any corresponding > > ‘default’ statement specified in the YANG schema.”; > > } > > > > With this, I’m not sure whether we need the “includes-default” leaf > currently specified in the draft, but if we do, then I would think that > leaf should be entirely optional, i.e., without the default “trim”. > > > > Regards, > Rob > > > > > > *From:* Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com> > *Sent:* 10 July 2021 17:41 > *To:* Rob Wilton (rwilton) <rwilton@cisco.com> > *Cc:* NetMod WG <netmod@ietf.org>; Balázs Lengyel < > balazs.lengyel@ericsson.com> > *Subject:* Re: [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults leaf > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 9, 2021 at 5:23 AM Rob Wilton (rwilton) <rwilton@cisco.com> > wrote: > > Andy, > > > > Yes, when I suggested this, I was thinking that a boolean flag might be > sufficient. My point being that automatically filtering out default values > isn’t always the right thing to do. > > > > > > > > The solution is simple. > > Get rid of the inappropriate "default trim" statement. > > > > If the leaf is present then it identifies the basic-mode that was used to > include defaults. > > If not then the information is either not known, not applicable, or > defaults were not added. > > > > The "default" statement is a bug because there is no default basic-mode. > > All of the basic-modes are in use in deployments and no camp has ever > > been able to convince the others that theirs is right. > > > > > > Andy > > > > E.g., something along these lines: > > > > leaf exclude-defaults { > > type boolean; > > default true; > > description > > “Can be used to reduce the size of the content data file. > > > > When unset or set to true, data nodes that have a default defined and > > where the actual value is the default value are excluded from the > content > > data. > > > > When set to false, data nodes with default value are not filtered, > and > > may appear in the content data.” > > } > > > > Would this satisfy your concern? > > > > Regards, > Rob > > > > > > *From:* netmod <netmod-bounces@ietf.org> *On Behalf Of *Andy Bierman > *Sent:* 08 July 2021 18:16 > *To:* NetMod WG <netmod@ietf.org> > *Subject:* [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults leaf > > > > Hi, > > > > The module has this object: > > > > leaf includes-defaults { > > type enumeration { > > enum report-all { > > value 1; > > description > > "All data nodes SHOULD be included independent of > > any default values."; > > } > > enum trim { > > value 2; > > description > > "Data nodes that have a default defined and where > > the actual value is the default value SHOULD > > NOT be included."; > > } > > enum explicit { > > value 3; > > description > > "Data nodes that have a default defined and where > > the actual value is the default value SHOULD NOT be > > included. However, if the actual value was set by > > a NETCONF client or other management application > > by the way of an explicit management operation the > > data node SHOULD be included."; > > } > > } > > default trim; > > > > The draft is extremely server-centric, like most IETF standards, but this > > leaf is too server-centric to ignore. > > > > Consider the possibility that the source of the file is NOT a NETCONF > server. > > This data may not be known so the default of "trim" may not be correct. > > > > IMO this leaf is noise because any tool that knows the schema will also > > know the YANG defaults. The solution is incomplete anyway because > > the presence of a leaf that has a YANG default is not enough. > > The "report-all-tagged" mode must be used to identify defaults. > > IMO this leaf should be removed, but at least add an enum called "unknown". > > > > > > Andy > > > > > >
- [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults leaf Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults … Rob Wilton (rwilton)
- Re: [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults … Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults … Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults … Balázs Lengyel
- Re: [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults … Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults … Rob Wilton (rwilton)
- Re: [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults … Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults … Rob Wilton (rwilton)
- Re: [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults … Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults … Balázs Lengyel
- Re: [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults … Balázs Lengyel
- Re: [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults … Rob Wilton (rwilton)
- Re: [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults … Balázs Lengyel
- Re: [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults … Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults … Balázs Lengyel
- Re: [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults … Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults … Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults … Balázs Lengyel
- Re: [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults … Balázs Lengyel
- Re: [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults … Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults … Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults … Balázs Lengyel
- Re: [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults … Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults … Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults … Rob Wilton (rwilton)
- Re: [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults … Balázs Lengyel
- Re: [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults … Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults … Rob Wilton (rwilton)
- Re: [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults … Balázs Lengyel
- Re: [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults … Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults … Benoit Claise
- Re: [netmod] yang-instance-file include-defaults … Rob Wilton (rwilton)