Re: [netmod] explicit mount

Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de> Wed, 24 February 2016 16:09 UTC

Return-Path: <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
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 A71CD1B37B3 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Feb 2016 08:09:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.856
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.856 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.006] autolearn=ham
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 VNIBaOhTX-IY for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Feb 2016 08:09:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from atlas3.jacobs-university.de (atlas3.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B16981B3810 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Wed, 24 Feb 2016 08:09:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (demetrius5.irc-it.jacobs-university.de [10.70.0.222]) by atlas3.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 111521A5E; Wed, 24 Feb 2016 17:09:39 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at jacobs-university.de
Received: from atlas3.jacobs-university.de ([10.70.0.220]) by localhost (demetrius5.jacobs-university.de [10.70.0.222]) (amavisd-new, port 10030) with ESMTP id rJsDN8pLfqj6; Wed, 24 Feb 2016 17:09:25 +0100 (CET)
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 atlas3.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Wed, 24 Feb 2016 17:09:38 +0100 (CET)
Received: from localhost (demetrius3.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.48]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 378BB20033; Wed, 24 Feb 2016 17:09:38 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at jacobs-university.de
Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de ([212.201.44.23]) by localhost (demetrius3.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.32]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gQZMcPPZWmUC; Wed, 24 Feb 2016 17:09:37 +0100 (CET)
Received: from elstar.local (elstar.jacobs.jacobs-university.de [10.50.231.133]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10C8E2002C; Wed, 24 Feb 2016 17:09:37 +0100 (CET)
Received: by elstar.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id 81E3439FCB9B; Wed, 24 Feb 2016 17:09:34 +0100 (CET)
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 17:09:33 +0100
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
To: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
Message-ID: <20160224160933.GA17873@elstar.local>
Mail-Followup-To: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>, netmod@ietf.org
References: <20160223.160806.696185201696745163.mbj@tail-f.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20160223.160806.696185201696745163.mbj@tail-f.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/MVA0U9_EmXTcu-E0XdCuGTyQD-Q>
Cc: netmod@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netmod] explicit mount
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
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: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 16:09:43 -0000

On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 04:08:06PM +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> In yesterday's meeting, Lou (I think?) mentioned a use case for mount
> that is not documented in draft-rtgyangdt-rtgwg-device-model; the need
> for being able to specify modules to mount directly in the schema.
> Something like this:
> 
>   container root {
>     ymnt:mount-point "lne" {
>       ymnt:mount-module "ietf-interfaces";
>     }
>   }
> 
> It would be useful if the use case for this could be described in more
> details.  Is it a requirement to be able to specify this in the
> schema, or could it be done (as Chris mentioned) in the RFC text?
> 
> The reason I ask is that it is probably not as simple as the example
> above.  First, you probably need to specify a revision of the module
> to be mounted.  Or a min-revision.  Then probably a set of features
> that must be enabled.  And so on.  It turns out that there is already
> a proposal for specifying such a "conformance profile" - YANG Packages
> (see draft-bierman-netmod-yang-package).  Maybe it would be better to
> re-use packages?

We are talking schema mount, right? So why would features matter? Yes,
there might be interesting versioning issues but how are they
different from an augmentation putting data under root? I naively
considered such a 'static schema defined mount' the simplest case,
then the 'augmented schema defined mount' naturally following from the
way augmentations work:

  augment /some:root {
    ymnt:mount-point "lne" {
      ymnt:mount-module "ietf-interfaces";
    }
  }

The 'dynamic runtime defined mounts' may be most flexible but then
they require me to read runtime data in order to adapt to the schema
structure, which has its own set of complexities. Yes, the versioning
issues go away since I have to adapt to each implementation
dynamically but there is surely a cost involved with that as well.

Am I missing something?

/js

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