Re: [netmod] Adding system configuration to running

Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com> Fri, 15 September 2017 08:11 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 D1625133070 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Sep 2017 01:11:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 CsLsSRYU8JUe for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Sep 2017 01:11:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf0-x236.google.com (mail-lf0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::236]) (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 AAB76133078 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Sep 2017 01:11:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf0-x236.google.com with SMTP id d17so1638908lfe.2 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Sep 2017 01:11:06 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yumaworks-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=jEHdHmiTWjmMTsebAy4/uozESasUuMLD8qqiEEeyNjc=; b=MIj9c2e0vhdZuDlnSf8G3m8s0IWuOKco8ki9WdJB7ty/ddLzayxia2vK7/uEFAVjyg 09ErofpezXagAAO+eHkfwJRRnOICNbGE6oS5BBTmtrpotfkAzxVJtdXeEO9EZeDkwHTP 0VEjmJoSH0cEHWw/+OPmV7Zqr9fFFNNEH8VLfWMVD3SsXI4yB8IMf/yftiahslpcUaF0 R72t21QLDNIVi3jLvN0dnek545M0wwaZjCwvmkzQ3ejPhBob9Uoz3t78VLfqU2HxRMqx 2264R811MEn2Jc2xj6Up8NDx/LJGCJBLxG9EEcS9RWFbPsO/dRu+i+fL2tJOLIx5YBSP HdEg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=jEHdHmiTWjmMTsebAy4/uozESasUuMLD8qqiEEeyNjc=; b=Dy4iAuTme25bT22dVJnpEF4si+N4fgV2aAZU3fzkV7cCyxUpW4v9NuZa/pb7V94i3e Vplf2u5RRA3dny+0y6E8JQz2TxQvI0LraCL0nkWKLm4cOI5chANwbXDxaunPa7wtA5sg DMKfuW19a+gy2Q0le1uPpa5L7Zl9w9UEy+4BB2TkBkCu3KVNNYMgn3YzyNmAZC3OMii/ 6+jhsPZ694jY64UCpnsesVD8DRaF3RN3ElnM/MYCvFwUp6FUa7Ni93jLaVkKeQOHSKPW tXYvhjHdYOPq53LDuigrhGq3LXkmvXGrvjf4IyAxnqIGucZOINpp/Dax30pY13CmcP52 GJew==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHPjjUhkOb4EtCUNtqsrSr4PTKWQ3RUoM4Q2sIZufjYzB2yOmkPlFsAk aZ1F20QpldNGJo8ZR1m09giCtn9VtHst30zvV2AnMQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QCydF1ct2FqygC/61wUXP7kBn+wk56nRXcPHd1i9EM08VZh/MYByxdw4wSooBxfhCIvlv32kIblcKkS4hlXm2I=
X-Received: by 10.46.4.129 with SMTP id a1mr10441913ljf.6.1505463064929; Fri, 15 Sep 2017 01:11:04 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.25.18.41 with HTTP; Fri, 15 Sep 2017 01:11:04 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20170915.073754.2218390958448188581.mbj@tail-f.com>
References: <CABCOCHQ64DUwH=4FHSDoxbSbugoo-OyrXDwq5_Evcrk+CjA43g@mail.gmail.com> <DF1AFB0F-53CB-40D2-B46F-2E5166705573@juniper.net> <CABCOCHTeK0qccKBwq5HC0WnJD7WL=TX_mjNZVqihYcy9iWvaww@mail.gmail.com> <20170915.073754.2218390958448188581.mbj@tail-f.com>
From: Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2017 01:11:04 -0700
Message-ID: <CABCOCHTv0sCyCeQsUDruYHPPqe2FyLcKzVT2veFa9zvMPkagXg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
Cc: Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net>, "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114a1690353bbc055935ef6d"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/9hOMxVS1s0FncehLTR9WlPNujMg>
Subject: Re: [netmod] Adding system configuration to running
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, 15 Sep 2017 08:11:09 -0000

On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 10:37 PM, Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com> wrote:

> Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 1:30 PM, Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net>
> wrote:
> > > > Maybe it is too early for NMDA to be making lots of rules about how
> > >
> > > > YANG works with new (and unimplemented) datastores.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Juniper has the equivalent of <intended> already.  I think others said
> > > they had
> > >
> > > something like it as well.
>
> Yes, we have that as well.  (No template expansion, but removal of
> inactive nodes).
>
> > If I can only do YANG validation on expanded templates in <intended>,
> does
> > that mean
> > it is impossible to do YANG validation on the templates themselves in
> > <running>?
> > The template subtree can only use YANG constraints on external structures
> > in <intended>
> > and not refer to itself in anyway (in <running>)?
>
> Note that the architecture draft does not specify any templating
> mechanism, it merely points out that templating is a mechanism that
> _can_ influence intended.  When/if such a mechanism is designed, it
> needs to work out all these details.
>
>
Doesn't it say YANG validation is done on <intended> and not on <running>?
If so, then how are YANG validation statements inside the template objects
evaluated?
Do they exist in both datastores, yet YANG validation is done in only 1
datastore?



>
> /martin
>
>
Andy


>
> >
> > The RD draft sure has a lot of normative details for something that does
> > not use RFC 2119
> > terminology at all. I didn't know a Standards Track document could omit
> > these terms.
> > Architecture documents are usually Informational.
> >
> > IMO the RD draft should not mention YANG or XPath at all.
> > That should be moved to an update to RFC 7950.
> > Those parts need more work anyway. The ARCH can move forward
> > without any dependence on YANG details.
> >
> >
> >
> > > Kent // contributor
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Andy
>