[netmod] <get-data> operation with "table join" capability

Xufeng Liu <xufeng.liu.ietf@gmail.com> Thu, 21 May 2020 12:24 UTC

Return-Path: <xufeng.liu.ietf@gmail.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 928ED3A0C4C; Thu, 21 May 2020 05:24:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 8UKNvN_OnkLf; Thu, 21 May 2020 05:24:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-il1-x132.google.com (mail-il1-x132.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::132]) (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 716C93A0C5E; Thu, 21 May 2020 05:24:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-il1-x132.google.com with SMTP id n11so6870836ilj.4; Thu, 21 May 2020 05:24:01 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=lvAwneA5+fJuA2DxRoC6V6T12mwwRmQVz5MYQ4IJg+c=; b=iGyB46BbFxMZSIgb7IcSNCUVSjC5LjLRHcXggBxcnJ5Jg+4YUwQKYHsnBIYOLDHe8R 72NAbY4YfMX75ThzeGchOF7MzJk7nM0rlWrx2u5mpYp6oQnVbbkYrdexP6dLPK0Spe5b AEVoRHte4P59IPguGLNUmurt9EkSi7Ub/pwRP7JXsmLxcrUshMi0hCtowyYTEIsOKnEg WtVgaLObmWKmDHZ3hmnfVwts0TJ1+MwR/SAYfcarAK3ZEl2bgBpiPxwnghS8LAapkyF1 kJga7Zf5dsDWz4RhshWMuAornp6MiCU+sCG4BcyvtkiKw+0lHughWjDXZTQ1dwfTl8EM 27Xw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=lvAwneA5+fJuA2DxRoC6V6T12mwwRmQVz5MYQ4IJg+c=; b=dtwDFDPimcaVv6a4TCI+kLf9Hapo9GFCKjhf/CgC749Ofv3j8ovR2rV1o+rfb/xqrT ThqpSZjb1pbjq9jxuSIGsuOPdUKjm+e9BX7Awr7Bb0wlh2zlh7ddlhQCMkzeDVreUV7X I9QzjZhzQSE8YDRwDBnjSz0OHMPfkksFzPkPq/pF/2dGX8UzeCxvVsfP8kAHYENm5Ai2 pz9p37k6qIli65fOYyHFpZToiY+qAM5w8jdAp0WaSOU2DfMvVNMdnLIOoiKhulzEsPON PNA84NZHzI5lBejhyJ+gDVyoZluHITDntvuCJvyLX09Z8AiA26jezA4gyBo0P8vqFL+D dGIA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532tOb3KdEtKmoxC4FQhQZd11KEiVbG0Y+iYO3XWI1YoIqkmo96I gCFAzOW/ISDrCoUhgrPbRR3S5JCU5Xar0e8G61ENh3oE
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxbt/NfTvxT0T2WHR2FE2CVOmGMut5H1LX3s5JYNr3CId2pkWIB7Hlb0Uw6IO/A4Y150EaLdTnH41qi0En3hNk=
X-Received: by 2002:a92:584b:: with SMTP id m72mr8090973ilb.119.1590063840184; Thu, 21 May 2020 05:24:00 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Xufeng Liu <xufeng.liu.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 21 May 2020 08:23:49 -0400
Message-ID: <CAEz6PPQ2u8kv7chFakXySuFWvJBzvEcHQ-F2-fHuVZFZAO2nmg@mail.gmail.com>
To: netconf <netconf@ietf.org>, NETMOD WG <netmod@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000005d4c0a05a627961e"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/D14C8MADZrLRElGWM9WEN3wwarg>
Subject: [netmod] <get-data> operation with "table join" capability
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: Thu, 21 May 2020 12:24:12 -0000

During the modeling discussion within TEAS WG, we encountered the dilemma
between more compact (with less or no redundant information) YANG structure
and less <get-data> operations. We are wondering if it is reasonable to
request NETCONF/YANG to support <get-data> operations with "table join"
capability that is equivalent to the SQL "JOIN" statement.

The issue is reported as the last section in
https://github.com/tsaad-dev/te/issues/98.

The desired capability is:

When a leafref or multiple leafrefs reference one or more objects specified
in other parts of the schema, the operator can use a single <get-data>
operation to retrieve all attributes of the object containing the leafref
and the attributes referenced by the leafref statement.

Thanks,
- Xufeng