IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [netmod] moving forward with schema mount

Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net> Tue, 23 January 2018 16:52 UTC

Return-Path: <kwatsen@juniper.net>
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 0BDF212706D for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Jan 2018 08:52:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.701
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=juniper.net
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 LrYNPN6947RI for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Jan 2018 08:52:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com (mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com [67.231.152.164]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CD021270B4 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 Jan 2018 08:52:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0108161.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w0NGmj2M031943; Tue, 23 Jan 2018 08:52:51 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=juniper.net; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=PPS1017; bh=Q47/1AZ02CPD6OzTsd/rg2IA38TXVynHXQciUfCwIVs=; b=jDyy5g6JCAhEnQjfGilazuhcrBfcavmEv0zBCr1eVSFav8wG6Wob4mUJ1dOMenTiYPAB D5xC9V/QsMYsg2vj1nTdSVZFCcIo7jk3iNi4GgmX+EL+oB7u6pOc+BJO1IFMiZ1oP3pD zN91SMm0HcXiEtnUTMfud2yZfDiahcrHdQDNUkhZKPZQ0s/nIokCL6G64PS1USrdUszL GsGLgRCuruxnaG7OSD0C3E7WzGkD65LCng3wv/VLgE+An/Thd73wtKx5eVMEUe351ZRb Hkvr2KJhMDgRoD3DGbxOtNDWlxTb6e9gYH0meTSGmNWfwv/THxGMl+/V/RThEpH0iOHi dA==
Received: from nam01-sn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-sn1nam01lp0115.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.163.115]) by mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2fp6rwga1b-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 23 Jan 2018 08:52:51 -0800
Received: from DM5PR05MB3484.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.174.240.147) by DM5PR05MB3468.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.174.240.143) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P256) id 15.20.444.5; Tue, 23 Jan 2018 16:52:50 +0000
Received: from DM5PR05MB3484.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.174.240.147]) by DM5PR05MB3484.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.174.240.147]) with mapi id 15.20.0444.013; Tue, 23 Jan 2018 16:52:50 +0000
From: Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net>
To: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
CC: "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [netmod] moving forward with schema mount
Thread-Index: AQHTk7xos3ciVL7Jy0SyClhY/I/+rKOBH66AgAA6OoA=
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 16:52:50 +0000
Message-ID: <2411D1AA-7D86-4DCD-BB8B-E7AE416EEFAB@juniper.net>
References: <BF9C1543-4471-4CB3-9A26-451F45A2E4B6@juniper.net> <20180123.092425.1788188537428313683.mbj@tail-f.com>
In-Reply-To: <20180123.092425.1788188537428313683.mbj@tail-f.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/f.20.0.170309
x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.13]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; DM5PR05MB3468; 7:QMjWAHruIKwqW5bpxHd65BhbN51oSpxYtA+QNg67sOhADxZflUrNMXwEIsjealeW+2oijTWvDEpsWuy1VTMK+R6SCJY1VOOYnPLQPJr2yNPNNYmOaustKScCqZ/ZNA5Pt4H+v1ikamg+iwU8j9KLtFc0uRIhS41GJEST9ldwMg2COToLS0jP9naTXbXjg+njQ861xuck70TldtI1nUX6CxNr4dhXz3N5Je+C7vdHnDYql40Ut1VygmhK5sRnjhkj
x-ms-exchange-antispam-srfa-diagnostics: SSOS;
x-ms-office365-filtering-ht: Tenant
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: f774736a-16df-4cae-8c9c-08d56281bcd4
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(7020095)(4652020)(48565401081)(4534165)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(5600026)(4604075)(3008032)(2017052603307)(7153060)(7193020); SRVR:DM5PR05MB3468;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: DM5PR05MB3468:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <DM5PR05MB34689FBB44496D57EEAE3747A5E30@DM5PR05MB3468.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(100405760836317);
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(6040501)(2401047)(5005006)(8121501046)(3231023)(2400081)(944501161)(93006095)(93001095)(3002001)(10201501046)(6055026)(6041288)(20161123560045)(20161123558120)(201703131423095)(201702281528075)(20161123555045)(201703061421075)(201703061406153)(20161123564045)(20161123562045)(6072148)(201708071742011); SRVR:DM5PR05MB3468; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(100000803101)(100110400095); SRVR:DM5PR05MB3468;
x-forefront-prvs: 05610E64EE
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(376002)(346002)(39860400002)(366004)(396003)(39380400002)(189003)(199004)(102836004)(33656002)(83506002)(14454004)(4326008)(305945005)(25786009)(6506007)(7736002)(478600001)(99286004)(36756003)(5660300001)(82746002)(2950100002)(6916009)(6116002)(3846002)(3280700002)(76176011)(2906002)(66066001)(77096007)(58126008)(6512007)(316002)(6436002)(229853002)(26005)(53936002)(6486002)(3660700001)(97736004)(6246003)(68736007)(105586002)(106356001)(8936002)(86362001)(2900100001)(81156014)(81166006)(8676002)(83716003); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:DM5PR05MB3468; H:DM5PR05MB3484.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: F5CfEJRqXb2lHVYK0OuWtzFAZtlBDbpSlPKyRt9wPqx8aI7HYgHKiLZFIuTGz3LFSTv4HEvJmFcjRxXhcjsm8w==
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <7D415EC1F2E35441ABCDA682AF48BC7C@namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: f774736a-16df-4cae-8c9c-08d56281bcd4
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 23 Jan 2018 16:52:50.0361 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM5PR05MB3468
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2018-01-23_05:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_spam_notspam policy=outbound_spam score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1711220000 definitions=main-1801230231
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/EYzdMmSrVvfQIXUI08ISYwAvfGs>
Subject: Re: [netmod] moving forward with schema mount
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: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 16:52:54 -0000

> So do you believe that this decision reflects rough consensus
> in the WG?

Not currently, as there are two vocal groups with opposing 
viewpoints.  However, there was strong for advancing it 
before.  The chairs had to make a decision and, as you can
imagine, it wasn't easy.  Ultimately, to use a colloquialism,
a bird in hand is better than two in the bush.


> I hope that the document writeup will show that the WG is
> divided on this issue.

It will and, undoubtedly, the IETF Last Call will be an 
interesting one.


> This new draft would immediately obsolete the current SM document,
> right?  And it would mark the current SM YANG nodes as deprecated.

A WG decision, but seems reasonable.  Are there any small things
that can be done to the current model to facilitate this?


> Maybe we can send both the original document and the bis document
> to the IESG at the same time ;-)

This would be fabulous.


Kent

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email