Re: [netmod] comments on draft-ietf-netmod-snmp-cfg--05

Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com> Fri, 13 June 2014 11:18 UTC

Return-Path: <andy@yumaworks.com>
X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E7271A04C8 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Jun 2014 04:18:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.978
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.978 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 2selz5om6Ond for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Jun 2014 04:18:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qc0-f171.google.com (mail-qc0-f171.google.com [209.85.216.171]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 827D91A0463 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Fri, 13 Jun 2014 04:18:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qc0-f171.google.com with SMTP id w7so3961835qcr.16 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Fri, 13 Jun 2014 04:18:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=dAJX+CW6c+PpBpg3CJ1/doDjORy87LdZ2VFYppTGZVA=; b=hElEuR3YJhUIsYWrcfyNheZvebDOKj+laAA1tSqLp3JW6622/KSLS2oZ1ZDRTGCAEb XMhkydXumulx++x2sKhrFsdlgzNf7whOeX98oI+c+bXgSTkGJnKSB7TVCB/PNaU0rqPc FjJAV76QTqpUdNoI/0TVJ5A6oCbLckh7+jvCKm2W+WROaBG8ODWMrmqB97MxBdkZPU6N xt7EIc1I45UU2bPVuSJ9hNxldtoHomZ3AnS+cVz80DfIHJnn8Jiyx4BWhBeN7qmVTIuG 7H/lh4WsX2WiE4Vxj2WfTfSHdmo8T6e1Krra5YSKZmaGdwstsLLGUs7Df+E4Axr4nOCh KP8w==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnLJdyP0ILJNcOP5nyu0RQyBfu6oFV0Xcb5ALqTT0rNKTjNvKoFOX0BR2wkLm/e68v+/0W3
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.229.93.133 with SMTP id v5mr2503416qcm.1.1402658282707; Fri, 13 Jun 2014 04:18:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.140.104.49 with HTTP; Fri, 13 Jun 2014 04:18:02 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20140613062605.GA37482@elstar.local>
References: <CABCOCHQnzdvOGGLDSOrNsRrW19aDvRNs+o9D-sqgqjtx21WN+g@mail.gmail.com> <20140613062605.GA37482@elstar.local>
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2014 04:18:02 -0700
Message-ID: <CABCOCHTRjrCA0A7swKtjMtLvsC0YbsWtRyQpAenbvV262xOCdA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>
To: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>, Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>, "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11330666aeb34604fbb5d40a"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/D4kGaWeDj8NmXxqR9P0D7eTccS0
Subject: Re: [netmod] comments on draft-ietf-netmod-snmp-cfg--05
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 13 Jun 2014 11:18:06 -0000

On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 11:26 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder <
j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de> wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 02:49:27PM -0700, Andy Bierman wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > It's probably past WG Last Call, but I still do not understand
> > the value of splitting the ietf-snmp configuration module into
> > 12 files (1 main + 11 sub-modules) instead of just 1 file.
> >
> > IMO it makes it harder to read, not easier, and wrt/ YANG library
> > management,
> > there are 12 files to update and keep in sync, instead of 1.
> >
> > Is there some expectation that individual sub-modules for SNMP
> > configuration will be updated regularly in new RFCs?
>
> The organization essentially reflects the modular structure of the
> SNMPv3 MIB modules. The SNMPv3 MIB modules are roughly the same
> number.
>
> If updates will ever will be necessary, we might benefit from the
> modular structure. If updates will never be needed, there is not much
> work with synchronizing the sub-modules either. Whether modularity is
> a good thing of not can likely be discussed endlessly. In this case,
> we followed the modular structure of the SNMPv3 MIB modules.
>
>
Seems like SNMP WG had a good reason to have 12 modules
(not all developed at once like the YANG modules). Half the
YANG text is boilerplate. (Copied 12 times to make sure it gets read!)

I am glad this module is an anomaly. Not one other YANG module
in the IETF uses submodules, let alone 11 of them.


/js
>

Andy


>
> --
> Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
> Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany
> Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>
>