IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [netmod] stable reference for tree diagram notation

Robert Wilton <rwilton@cisco.com> Mon, 13 March 2017 19:10 UTC

Return-Path: <rwilton@cisco.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 5408D129AC2 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 12:10:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.521
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.521 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 KzvgfkeDsKjZ for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 12:10:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aer-iport-3.cisco.com (aer-iport-3.cisco.com [173.38.203.53]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CF01912945C for <netmod@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 12:10:42 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=9818; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1489432243; x=1490641843; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=wIy1jGZ80akkrCksiZUSMruLv2KTq8bZB4lyoCMGUyM=; b=jbdqJTf8oqsRah0aDH6VaIXdfe/E8n/GU33FVYx9OWyNlUzFqWdD48Yw 1LuLTYFrRAJy4bsvvKqQpR+tB6r6uY+LKzleTVdPquAtu84ItbW222JQa Gi8wT8EapcaE7J6Zvqwa2jsbEQn3qWMn415gYnFiXtzOjWo39mWdBiIYd U=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0C3AgDy7cZY/xbLJq1dGQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBBwEBAQEBhDIqYINgig5zkD8fkA6FLYIOHwEMhSxKAoMhGAECAQEBAQEBAWsohRUBAQEBAgEBASFLCxALEAgnAwICJx8RBgEMBgIBAYl0CA6uDYImK4otAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBGAWGToIFCIJih1qCXwWWAIZBhnaLQ4F7iFeGU4hFgnCIDh84gQQjFggXFUGEHoI5QDWJYgEBAQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.36,160,1486425600"; d="scan'208,217";a="651424789"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-2.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 13 Mar 2017 19:10:40 +0000
Received: from [10.63.23.115] (dhcp-ensft1-uk-vla370-10-63-23-115.cisco.com [10.63.23.115]) by aer-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v2DJAeVO022917; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 19:10:40 GMT
To: Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>, Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
References: <271CED23-8655-45A8-8E05-3ABD460871BD@juniper.net> <20170308193434.GA10080@elstar.local> <D4E9D4E5.A12DC%acee@cisco.com> <20170311.224951.2245774412799352894.mbj@tail-f.com> <ff00c44b-e0f0-fb30-783f-a992e723da8d@cisco.com> <6fe6a732-ccda-a93d-f005-63ec25cebf60@labn.net> <CABCOCHTRsCZdJ5J2QAQoxQ0W3vH1hoJCQF0d26Hy1x-JmBcOUg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Robert Wilton <rwilton@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <461f2c01-9324-7d4f-6774-374e9fb09851@cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 19:10:40 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CABCOCHTRsCZdJ5J2QAQoxQ0W3vH1hoJCQF0d26Hy1x-JmBcOUg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------E79E67D9D5E770098BE22047"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/HTfCuRaSKddNZwPL7d7Zn_4UAEg>
Cc: "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [netmod] stable reference for tree diagram notation
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 19:10:46 -0000


On 13/03/2017 19:07, Andy Bierman wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 11:26 AM, Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net 
> <mailto:lberger@labn.net>> wrote:
>
>     FYI - just slapped together and published:
>
>     https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bjorklund-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams-00
>     <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bjorklund-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams-00>
>
>     Lou
>
>     (as contributor)
>
>     PS I'm happy with the definition being in 6780bis or in a
>     standalone doc
>     (as above), but really think we as a WG need to decide ASAP so as
>     not to
>     hold up 6780bis any further...
>
>
>
>
> standalone doc is fine.
>
> does this mean the contents of the tree diagram and the syntax for the
> tree diagram are subject to WG consensus?
That would seem to make sense, given that they are used in all drafts 
describing YANG models.

Rob


>
>
> Andy
>
>     On 3/13/2017 2:20 PM, Robert Wilton wrote:
>     > Hi Andy,
>     >
>     > Would it make sense to update 6087bis section 4.4 to reference
>     this new
>     > pyang option for generated tree diagrams?
>     >
>     > Thanks,
>     > Rob
>     >
>     >
>     > On 11/03/2017 21:49, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
>     >> "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com <mailto:acee@cisco.com>>
>     wrote:
>     >>> Hi Juergen,
>     >>>
>     >>> On 3/8/17, 2:34 PM, "netmod on behalf of Juergen Schoenwaelder"
>     >>> <netmod-bounces@ietf.org <mailto:netmod-bounces@ietf.org> on
>     behalf of
>     >>> j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de
>     <mailto:j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>> wrote:
>     >>>
>     >>>> On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 06:56:20PM +0000, Kent Watsen wrote:
>     >>>>> This way, reader can focus more quickly on the diffs, but
>     also this
>     >>>>> likely mimics what happened in reality (start with `pyang -f
>     tree`
>     >>>>> and then manually edit from there). What do you think?
>     >>>>>
>     >>>> Manually edited tree diagrams? I hope not.
>     >>> I frequently have to manually edit the pyang-generated trees
>     to get them
>     >>> to fit in the xml2rfc output. Is there a work around for this
>     that I don¹t
>     >>> know about?
>     >> In the latest pyang, I have added --tree-line-length.  Use:
>     >>
>     >>    pyang -f -tree --tree-line-length 69 ...
>     >>
>     >> to fit RFCs.
>     >>
>     >>
>     >> /martin
>     >>
>     >> _______________________________________________
>     >> netmod mailing list
>     >> netmod@ietf.org <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
>     >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>     <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod>
>     >> .
>     >>
>     > _______________________________________________
>     > netmod mailing list
>     > netmod@ietf.org <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
>     > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>     <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod>
>     >
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email