Re: [netmod] Schema-mount question: Augmentation to the Mounted Module

["Xufeng Liu" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Martin,

That will be good.
Thanks,
- Xufeng

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin Bjorklund [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 8:38 AM
> To: [e-mail]
> Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]; draft-ietf-netmod-schema-
> [e-mail]; [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [netmod] Schema-mount question: Augmentation to the Mounted
> Module
> 
> "Xufeng Liu" <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > Hi Martin,
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Martin Bjorklund [mailto:[e-mail]]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2017 1:07 PM
> > > To: [e-mail]
> > > Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail];
> > > draft-ietf-netmod-schema- [e-mail]; [e-mail]
> > > Subject: Re: [netmod] Schema-mount question: Augmentation to the
> > > Mounted Module
> > >
> > > Ladislav Lhotka <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On 14 Jun 2017, at 13:43, Lou Berger <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > (speaking as contributor...)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 6/14/2017 7:17 AM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> > > > >> Hi Xufeng,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> please see my answers inline.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Xufeng Liu <[e-mail]> writes:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> Hi Lada,
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> We have got two questions on how to specify the module entries
> > > > >>> in a
> > > > >>> schema:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> 1. Are augmentations of parent modules inherited when
> > > > >>> augmented module is listed in schema-mounts schema?
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> For example, ietf-ospf module augments ietf-routing. When we
> > > > >>> include ietf-routing to the schema entry, is ietf-ospf
> > > > >>> automatically
> > > included?
> > > > >> No, you also have to include "ietf-ospf" in the "module" list
> > > > >> inside the corresponding "schema" entry, exactly as you do in
> > > > >> the top level YANG library, otherwise ietf-ospf won't be mounted.
> > > > >
> > > > > I agree.  The draft should have text that makes this explicit.
> > > >
> > > > Why? It should be sufficiently clear that modules that are not
> > > > listed in "schema" are not present in the mounted schema. An
> > > > augment is just a special mechanism of contributing schema nodes.
> > >
> > > Yes I agree.  But let's see if we can clarify the text.  Xufeng,
> > > what in
> > the current
> > > text led you to believe that a module in the parent schema would be
> > > automatically present in the mounted schema?
> > >
> > [Xufeng] Thanks for looking at this. The confusion is because of the
> > lack of text, I would say. The term "mount" has an analogy to the Unix
> > file system "mount", where what we only specify the parent directory
> > and child file system (the connecting relationship at the connection
> > point). Also, similar is the command for the Unix soft/hard links,
> > where we don't need to check if there are other links under the child.
> 
> I see.  Note that the analogy doesn't quite work, since there is no
requirement
> that the mounted module is even present in the parent schema.  It has been
> suggested before that the term "mount" is unfortunate...  Anyway, I think
we
> can clarify that there is really no relation between the parent schema and
> mounted modules, maybe like
> this:
> 
>   The modules that are mounted under a mount point has no relation to
>   the modules in the parent schema; specifically, if a module is
>   mounted it may or may not be present in the parent schema.
> 
> 
> 
> /martin