Re: [netmod] Y60 - coexistence with YANG 1.0

Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz> Thu, 10 September 2015 11:20 UTC

Return-Path: <lhotka@nic.cz>
X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B4781B3172 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Sep 2015 04:20:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.361
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.361 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HELO_EQ_CZ=0.445, HOST_EQ_CZ=0.904, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=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 TUXPbsVmB3hr for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Sep 2015 04:20:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.nic.cz (mail.nic.cz [IPv6:2001:1488:800:400::400]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CD9981B40E2 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Thu, 10 Sep 2015 04:20:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [IPv6:2001:718:1a02:1:6c65:7fe3:d7e3:b1aa] (unknown [IPv6:2001:718:1a02:1:6c65:7fe3:d7e3:b1aa]) by mail.nic.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 61FDA181805; Thu, 10 Sep 2015 13:20:22 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nic.cz; s=default; t=1441884022; bh=sgvc8kwxNUIcyH6tO0O4lstuzmjAEnoy2dsEcV2HbOw=; h=From:Date:To; b=QOUxcIUxq8KqAY5pwW1qtm7bX+uGKPFdwrmBotxMGF3v9ZL4YtbCOiK8VN6twLeGN SfhHi2swCjhnILU3gTlYKv0QZ6pdh5nQGr+CthVFTnE/hn0v4MfMXI57aMrQDLQ1cf DTWHb4wCu6J4T1h7ZbP2fpU6G/p6Bwn4mNjQ9+9w=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\))
From: Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz>
In-Reply-To: <20150910.125522.373110083925215588.mbj@tail-f.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2015 13:20:22 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <DF93C199-5972-405C-97DB-57CE36BE3DF3@nic.cz>
References: <20150910.125522.373110083925215588.mbj@tail-f.com>
To: Martin Björklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104)
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.98.7 at mail
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/M1cXnc7SZoidiG0KLINcMIZpXw4>
Cc: netmod@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netmod] Y60 - coexistence with YANG 1.0
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Thu, 10 Sep 2015 11:20:26 -0000

> On 10 Sep 2015, at 12:55, Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I think we agreed that is ok for a YANG 1.1 module to import a YANG
> 1.0 module.
> 
> But should it also be ok for a 1.0 module to import a 1.1 module?

I think it should be illegal for a 1.0 module to import with revision if the requested revision is 1.1.

> 
> If we make this illegal, we might run into problems.  For example,
> ietf-ip imports ietf-interfaces.  Suppose we update ietf-interfaces
> and the new version use YANG 1.1.  Is it ok for a server to implement
> the 1.0 version of ietf-ip and 1.1 version of ietf-interfaces?  If the
> answer is no, it means that we either have to update all modules to
> 1.1 more or less at the same time (including vendor models!), or we
> keep existing modules on 1.0 "forever".
> 
> At the lastest interim, it was suggested that a server that implements
> such a combination of models would internally promote the 1.0 module
> to 1.1, and thus make this combination legal.

I think we need a way for the server to identify itself to the client as 1.1-capable, and then:

- 1.1-capable server: if 1.0 module X imports Y *without revision*, and the revision of Y advertised by the server (with default-revision=true), then module X is automatically interpreted as 1.1.

- 1.0-only server: if 1.0 module X import Y without revision, then the latest 1.0 revision of Y is used. If 1.1 revisions exist, they are not used.

> 
> Such a strategy should also be safe for old clients, still treating
> the module as being 1.0.

I am not sure about this, I think a 1.0-only client cannot work with a 1.1-capable server is some 1.1 additions are used (e.g. if-feature expressions).

> 
> It is a bit unclear what the server should do if the 1.0 module that
> it "internally promotes" to 1.1 contains something that is illegal in
> 1.1, e.g.:
> 
>        default "a\xb”;

We should write an erratum to 6020 making this illegal in 1.0, too.

Lada

> 
> Comments?
> 
> 
> /martin
> 
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> netmod@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C