Re: [netmod] comments on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-instance-file-format-04

[Martin Bjorklund <[e-mail]>]

Balázs Lengyel <[e-mail]> wrote:
> See below!    Balazs
> 
>  
> 
> From: netmod <[e-mail]> On Behalf Of Andy Bierman
> Sent: 2019. október 10., csütörtök 17:34
> To: Martin Bjorklund <[e-mail]>
> Cc: NetMod WG <[e-mail]>
> Subject: Re: [netmod] comments on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-instance-file-format-04
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 5:06 AM Martin Bjorklund <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> > wrote:
> 
> 
>   o  leaf-list module
> 
>     The type of this leaf-list is a string with:
> 
>       pattern '.+@\d{4}-\d{2}-\d{2}\.yang';
> 
>     I think the revision needs to be optional, and the suffix ".yang"
>     dropped, since it doesn't add any value:
> 
>       pattern '.+(@\d{4}-\d{2}-\d{2})?';
> 
>    (same for inline-spec).
> 
>  
> 
> IMO the filespec SHOULD follow the pattern in  https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7950#section-5.2
> 
> BALAZS: It does follow the pattern except that I made the revision date mandatory. It is needed to properly understand the instance data.
> 
>  
> 
> Except a new file extension SHOULD be used.
> 
> Suggest: .yif == YANG Instance File
> 
>  
> 
> Obviously it would be a horrible idea to use .yang since that extension
> 
> is already used to identify a YANG schema file.
> 
> BALAZS: The leaf-list lists not the instance data files but the content defining YANG modules, so IMO “.yang” is an appropriate extension. It is really a YANG schema file we are listing.

No, you are not listing a file name, you are listing the name and,
optionally, the revision of a YANG *module*.  It can internally be
stored as a .yang file a .yin file, or as a blob in a database.

Hence, we should not have the ".yang" suffix here.


/martin