Re: [netmod] Using augment to overwrite an existing definition?

Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de> Tue, 10 April 2018 09:53 UTC

Return-Path: <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
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 E8D11124B18 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Apr 2018 02:53:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 a6DZV3xUV8SJ for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Apr 2018 02:53:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from atlas5.jacobs-university.de (atlas5.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E045412D88A for <netmod@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Apr 2018 02:53:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (demetrius5.irc-it.jacobs-university.de [10.70.0.222]) by atlas5.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1451BE7F; Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:53:28 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at jacobs-university.de
Received: from atlas5.jacobs-university.de ([10.70.0.217]) by localhost (demetrius5.jacobs-university.de [10.70.0.222]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id TBLoiPRRuc-S; Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:53:26 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de (hermes.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "hermes.jacobs-university.de", Issuer "Jacobs University CA - G01" (verified OK)) by atlas5.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:53:27 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from localhost (demetrius4.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.49]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4CDE20035; Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:53:27 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at jacobs-university.de
Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de ([212.201.44.23]) by localhost (demetrius4.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.32]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SIV3c5cTvp56; Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:53:27 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from elstar.local (unknown [10.50.231.133]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A10220031; Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:53:27 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by elstar.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id AC41042AE39D; Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:53:26 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:53:26 +0200
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
To: Jiangyuanlong <jiangyuanlong@huawei.com>
Cc: Jan Lindblad <janl@tail-f.com>, "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <20180410095326.qp4d3zyjusimnx7d@elstar.local>
Reply-To: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
Mail-Followup-To: Jiangyuanlong <jiangyuanlong@huawei.com>, Jan Lindblad <janl@tail-f.com>, "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
References: <3B0A1BED22CAD649A1B3E97BE5DDD68BBB6CBE12@dggeml507-mbs.china.huawei.com> <F0213241-5915-43DC-A43D-3B5DAC1B6980@tail-f.com> <3B0A1BED22CAD649A1B3E97BE5DDD68BBB6CBEB0@dggeml507-mbs.china.huawei.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3B0A1BED22CAD649A1B3E97BE5DDD68BBB6CBEB0@dggeml507-mbs.china.huawei.com>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20171215
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/M-3v_vYxeHJ8S2BCRnVIueOGJZA>
Subject: Re: [netmod] Using augment to overwrite an existing definition?
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, 10 Apr 2018 09:53:39 -0000

On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 09:45:02AM +0000, Jiangyuanlong wrote:

> I also don't like when standards bodies are playing with deviations. They are meant to be a last resort for implementors that are unable to follow a standard. If a standard requires the use of deviations, the value of the standard is diluted. And if an implementor would want to deviate from the standard, how would he deviate from the deviation?

> [Yuanlong] we are not targeting to use these codes in our standards, but trying to simulate some possible derived implementations. In the past, there was no unified MIB standards for IEEE 1588, this resulted in very diversified  practices in its management.

Then it seems a deviation is a proper way to declare that this leaf is
not configurable in a given implementation.

/js

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