Re: [netmod] yang-data-ext issues

Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com> Wed, 18 April 2018 17:43 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 A5C021270A3 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Apr 2018 10:43:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.621
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.621 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTTPS_HTTP_MISMATCH=1.989, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.01] 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 soJCAyHf7UIn for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Apr 2018 10:43:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf0-x22f.google.com (mail-lf0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::22f]) (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 1045C12D883 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Apr 2018 10:43:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id g203-v6so3862915lfg.11 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Apr 2018 10:43:44 -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=3ZQJKhsJ3vsL87KFn0cwl2CSBnbl+IqG3EV559FooGE=; b=PF3+BQy6+mJP555oOK9+e771aKlfZnzb1BtP5uHH9dl9pNswDPicDxS/9DpagYGgJj bDtakztCLSbKjoywkhpQD240YOn3XuC+XI91fohPilLMWmPv7GX3tPTvjlUt+amrm4lg oLEMtg+A2rbNXCf0QUmmMwZP5XDZmsdEx9huT8Ek3jC1oJ4Hxa+ludj9re0M/rgN0GOM OFkcckMSBlvpGYqVIX8byNB8SLneGZplYgA6JNmnebKEzgTHEn9jgL5kqJiEAv9q0hqI 2yWVlFQK/KIsp9t49IhFxzppP0VoWe3AgZs9p3MUT/D31NWMR2kfXlyj3/6UOIT9HOSE AGSQ==
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=3ZQJKhsJ3vsL87KFn0cwl2CSBnbl+IqG3EV559FooGE=; b=nxZxW72QX3xFwPRNlk8IAte30Nk37oqaFHYzOJYrfOEWpnAgZVtPxbJ/RormzolELi M9TWiMoB2apF1NMVLuYdKZCultvVOIJ09a1RSE5CQ5KLTHDXNMrVb8MoA/gapFlqEv74 yMYX04YdTwaaPz7xfeSXyQL3F4GTvS0VGv6hzpuSirofoySze8nLmUnHy2xLwQfgATUs V2CF5e+ESiquZyyhQ/ZG8CgZbNHE6SQwFDpVBVdG8Wl2ZnRu+wH0cF5jPiq5L6LAqGWP kv2nCRagKME8wk8/kCxOoxSfR2FFtMgOQ1EZPNTYJdgvsQHgfXRux1DFvjGqom3abNmD fuhw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALQs6tBqQfOsbaBFi1Snj5gdKKSTBtHnXZo0bmfr4X5aV9dgD0OnPQ44 hEaSRirD2OQcFZ8aYnPRykezyPkLH1lPDot0JZJh4g==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx489rTIlG4PVh1jd0VjLRK+uguQ/1DWCIjjcrkJZFNtlZPeay0o/U8BEtam9MNxSw2Qu3HHfu6GQsbax5ssPLdo=
X-Received: by 10.46.62.12 with SMTP id l12mr2005459lja.66.1524073423076; Wed, 18 Apr 2018 10:43:43 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 2002:a19:d8c6:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Wed, 18 Apr 2018 10:43:42 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <AD15A3E2-71BC-4134-AAFD-BA249ABDEEB1@juniper.net>
References: <20180416.145617.1262098657698751846.mbj@tail-f.com> <CABCOCHQS5SdJhZrgoVug4Lux2WLCmieN26Kte_FEdzh9VB=riw@mail.gmail.com> <ef8e1caf-686e-1074-d094-6b6cd907a1a8@cisco.com> <CABCOCHRr=h=G43aJqwVRc+pcs-QV93_adHB4hDQckkVpacH8eA@mail.gmail.com> <6e111dfc-efc7-109f-40f5-8cdba72021fc@cisco.com> <CABCOCHSMQbg6jbafgq90E26OxSGf=9ERDxamJ3s9cp_LN4QC_w@mail.gmail.com> <AD15A3E2-71BC-4134-AAFD-BA249ABDEEB1@juniper.net>
From: Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 10:43:42 -0700
Message-ID: <CABCOCHTkCJY0UDkOMNUs3DPppWgPMQ4zAW2PwE9EJLZ2+VncbA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net>
Cc: Robert Wilton <rwilton@cisco.com>, NetMod WG <netmod@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f4f5e8075c40fe915c056a22fe47"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/AOixNdBQray5DLKSg3HCc4U2v_M>
Subject: Re: [netmod] yang-data-ext issues
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: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 17:43:52 -0000

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 10:26 AM, Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net>; wrote:

> I like Andy's proposal below, for the argument of the 'yang-data'
> statement to encode some meta-information regarding the context/namespace
> in which it's used, but I wonder how it really works.  For instance, would
> "top" and "error-info" be the only allowed base-path values for the
> argument? and what is the value of the remainder of the path?  are we
> expecting for there to be some kind us 'uses' statement that can refer to
> just the base-path component to implement substitution-group like behavior?
>
>
>


If we want to avoid defining these contexts, then we could just define root
vs. nonroot.

e,g:

x:yang-data /mydef1 {
  container foo;
}

x:yang-data mydef2 {
  leaf x;
  leaf y;
  container z;
}


Only an argument starting with '/' would be treated as a top-level data
node.

All other yang-data definitions are not allowed to appear as a root node.
The context where this yang-data is used is completely proprietary.
The mechanism used to expand this yang-data as if it was a grouping
is completely proprietary.

The augment-yang-data extension only applies to top-level yang-data
definitions.

However, my preference is to only standardize top-level yang-data.
I do not see any need for the other form since all functionality can be
achieved with a grouping and a proprietary YANG extension.

Kent // contributor
>

Andy


>
>
>
>
> On 4/16/18, 1:05 PM, "netmod on behalf of Andy Bierman" <
> netmod-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of andy@yumaworks.com>; wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 9:46 AM, Robert Wilton <rwilton@cisco.com>; wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> On 16/04/2018 17:07, Andy Bierman wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 8:44 AM, Robert Wilton <rwilton@cisco.com>; wrote:
>
> Don't groupings have a somewhat similar concern?
>
>  E.g. if two groupings define the same data node name and are used at the
> same point then you would get a namespace clash, but YANG does not disallow
> the groupings:
>
>
>      grouping foo_widget {
>
>        leaf name {
>
>          type string;
>
>          description "Name of my foo widget";
>
>        }
>
>      }
>
>
>
>      grouping bar_widget {
>
>        leaf name {
>
>          type string;
>
>          description "Name of my bar widget";
>
>        }
>
>      }
>
>
>
>      container all_widgets {
>
>        uses foo_widget;
>
>        uses bar_widget;
>
>      }
>
>
> The principal difference here, is that the compiler can easily check and
> reject the conflict at the uses statements.
>
> Hence I think that it would be good if we could find a solution for
> yang-data-ext that doesn't not require all root yang-data nodes to be
> unique, since that feels somewhat clunky.  I.e. my preference is to keep
> them less restrictive, as Martin has proposed, if this is feasible.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> It is not clunky that 2 top-level YANG data nodes in the same module
>
> have unique names. This is simple and deterministic.
>
> This restriction has not been a problem so far.
>
> I agree with the statements above.
>
> But it is not clear to me that yang-data-ext is really defining new top
> level data nodes that are part of the same tree/namespace as the
> configuration/state nodes.  In Martin's examples they were used within
> RPCs, and it the forcing the names to be unique in that context that I
> think would be clunky.  E.g. in Martin's example forcing different names
> for "reason" and "user-info" doesn't seem to be helpful.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> The yang-data statement has to define the context or new abstract
> namespace,
>
> or whatever this hack is called.
>
> Perhaps.  I think that this depends on how they are used.
>
>
>
>
>
> The yang-data statement has to specify the expansion point, or
>
> at least specify that it is or is not the top-level.
>
>
>
>   yang-data top/name1 {
>
>       container mydata;
>
>   }
>
>
>
> where context is something like "top" or "error-info", etc.
>
>
>
> It is trivial to use groupings if the same set of nodes needs to be used
> in different contexts:
>
>
>
>
>   yang-data error-info/name1 {
>
>       container mydata;
>
>   }
>
>
>
> Only the context named "top" is restricted to a resulting single-container
>
> and cannot have duplicate names.
>
>
>
> This is OK:
>
>
>
>   x:yang-data error-info/my-error1 {
>
>       leaf reason {}
>
>   }
>
>
>
>
>   x:yang-data error-info/my-error2 {
>
>       leaf reason {}
>
>   }
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Could a fix for this be something along the lines of:
>  - yang-data names must be unique amongst other top level data nodes
> within the module.
>  - if yang-data extensions are used at the top level then their name must
> be used as a single top level container.
>  - if a yang-data extension is used within another structure then the
> yang-data name is excluded, and the top level nodes defined in the
> yang-data definition are used ....
>
>
>   Every tool that implements yang-data has to be able
>
> to interpret a yang-data statement exactly the same way.
>
>
>
> If you want to reinvent XSD substitutionGroup, then do it right.
>
> I'm not familiar with them.  From a quick read, I don't see how they are
> related to the problem that we are trying to solve here.
>
>
>
>
>
> A substitutionGroup allows a point int the schema to be identified by name.
>
> Different elements can be defined that match this name, which then can be
>
> used (like a YANG choice) at the specified schema point.
>
> (e.g. error-info above is like a substitutionGroup)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks,
> Rob
>
>
>
> Andy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks,
> Rob
>
>
>
>
>
> Andy
>
>
>
>
>
> On 16/04/2018 15:36, Andy Bierman wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
> I am strongly opposed to this change because it breaks the rule in YANG 1.1
>
> that there cannot be 2 sibling nodes defined in the same module namespace.
>
>
>
> IMO since any yang-data nodes are ALLOWED to be used at the top-level,
>
> then these top-level nodes cannot have conflicting names.
>
>
>
> It is very important when parsing an instance document that the instance
> data
>
> can be associated with the correct schema.  This is not possible if the
>
> same top-level node has multiple yang-data nodes defined.
>
>
>
> If one needs to define data that is not top-level, (1) use
> augment-yang-data
>
> or (2) use a different module.
>
>
>
>
>
> Andy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 5:56 AM, Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>; wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> While preparing draft-ietf-netmod-yang-data-ext-02, it turned out that
> it is not clear what, if any, restrictions should be enforced for
> yang-data structures.  Even among the authors we have different ideas
> for how this should work.
>
> Background:
>
> In 8040, the original yang-data extension had a restriction that said
> that a yang-data structure MUST have exactly one container, since it
> wouldn't be possible to have a yang-data structure in an XML instance
> document otherwise.
>
> Since people want to use yang-data structures in other places, this
> restriction was lifted in the new draft:
>
>    There is no longer an assumption that a yang data structure can
>    only be used as a top-level abstraction, instead of nested within
>    some other data structure.
>
>
> With this in mind, here's a use case that I think we ought to support:
>
>   rpc my-first-rpc {
>     description
>       "Bla bla...
>        If an error occurs, <error-info> will contain an instance of
>        the yang-data structure 'my-first-rpc-error-info'.";
>     ...
>   }
>
>   yang-data my-first-rpc-error-info {
>     leaf reason { ... }
>     container user-info { ... }
>   }
>
>   rpc my-second-rpc {
>     description
>       "Bla bla...
>        If an error occurs, <error-info> will contain an instance of
>        the yang-data structure 'my-second-rpc-error-info'.";
>     ...
>   }
>
>   yang-data my-second-rpc-error-info {
>     leaf reason { ... }
>     leaf important-url { ... }
>   }
>
> (maybe in the future we could even have a YANG extension statement to
> formalize the description:
>
>    rpc my-first-rpc {
>      ...
>      opx:error-info-structure my-first-rpc-error-info;
>    }
>
> but this is not point now.)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I see no reason to reinvent the grouping-stmt.
>
> You could easily say opx:error-info-structure argument is a grouping name
>
> as it is a yang-data name.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> In the example above, note that the leaf "reason" is present in both
> structures.  IMO this is not a problem, since these structures are
> used in different contexts.
>
> My point is that I think we should impose as few restrictions as
> possible to the yang-data extension.  It should be up to the user of
> yang-data to ensure that the structure is defined in such a way so
> that it can be used properly.  For example, a structure that is
> supposed to describe an XML instance document cannot define two leafs
> at the top level.
>
> If the WG agrees with what I wrote above, we need to change the
> augment-yang-data extension so that you would write for example:
>
>   yx:augment-yang-data /ex:my-first-rpc-error-info/ex:user-info {
>     ...
>   }
>
> Comments?
>
>
>
> /martin
>
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> netmod@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_netmod&d=DwMFaQ&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=9zkP0xnJUvZGJ9EPoOH7Yhqn2gsBYaGTvjISlaJdcZo&m=q6I_yKbXVoahv9h5I1wZiQMUeHLZ5XWuMohEYtypmzs&s=jECZMhypw9LtuxzuntkFNM-8lm7xpztYwDDLOxCM_8k&e=>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> netmod mailing list
>
> netmod@ietf.org
>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_netmod&d=DwMFaQ&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=9zkP0xnJUvZGJ9EPoOH7Yhqn2gsBYaGTvjISlaJdcZo&m=q6I_yKbXVoahv9h5I1wZiQMUeHLZ5XWuMohEYtypmzs&s=jECZMhypw9LtuxzuntkFNM-8lm7xpztYwDDLOxCM_8k&e=>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>