IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [netmod] WG adoption poll draft-bjorklund-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams

Alexander Clemm <alexander.clemm@huawei.com> Sat, 08 April 2017 01:16 UTC

Return-Path: <alexander.clemm@huawei.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 49FAE126DDF; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 18:16:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.222
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.222 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 Ije_K3zmJ4vd; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 18:16:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 526921279EB; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 18:16:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO LHREML712-CAH.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id DKM71545; Sat, 08 Apr 2017 01:16:52 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from SJCEML702-CHM.china.huawei.com (10.208.112.38) by LHREML712-CAH.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.35) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.301.0; Sat, 8 Apr 2017 02:16:51 +0100
Received: from SJCEML701-CHM.china.huawei.com ([169.254.3.8]) by SJCEML702-CHM.china.huawei.com ([169.254.4.233]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 18:16:44 -0700
From: Alexander Clemm <alexander.clemm@huawei.com>
To: Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net>, "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
CC: "netmod-chairs@ietf.org" <netmod-chairs@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: WG adoption poll draft-bjorklund-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams
Thread-Index: AQHSr/Xg1jVz8di74UG+w/RFCeh9O6G6p7Ow
Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2017 01:16:43 +0000
Message-ID: <644DA50AFA8C314EA9BDDAC83BD38A2E0DF90711@SJCEML701-CHM.china.huawei.com>
References: <159225DB-1D0D-4A75-BFE8-C28F651AE4F0@juniper.net>
In-Reply-To: <159225DB-1D0D-4A75-BFE8-C28F651AE4F0@juniper.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.213.48.176]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A020201.58E83A04.00B1, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0, ip=169.254.3.8, so=2013-06-18 04:22:30, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32
X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: d8d4b6246a198b5e3766ec7f50ff8e45
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/Mm1ECYjezgngA_y_36Le1Nvt7gU>
Subject: Re: [netmod] WG adoption poll draft-bjorklund-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams
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: Sat, 08 Apr 2017 01:16:57 -0000

I do have a question re: the rationale that is given in the document: " Today's Common practice is include the definition of the syntax used   to represent a YANG module in every document that provides a tree diagram.  This practice has several disadvantages and the purpose of   the document is to provide a single location for this definition. "

I am not sure how much simplification this will really bring - is the boilerplate paragraph we find in drafts with YANG tree diagrams today really that a big problem, specifically while the snippet is still small enough (and could arguably even be generated by pyang itself, if extended accordingly, for easy pasting into drafts)?  While having a common and consistent definition in a central location is appreciated, one implication as the tree notation evolves will be that documents may now have to be specific as to which notation revision is used (as the notation might be updated, revisions might need to be maintained, although it is understood that churn will be kept to a minimum).  

--- Alex

-----Original Message-----
From: netmod [mailto:netmod-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Kent Watsen
Sent: Friday, April 07, 2017 4:23 PM
To: netmod@ietf.org
Cc: netmod-chairs@ietf.org
Subject: [netmod] WG adoption poll draft-bjorklund-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams

All,

This is start of a two-week poll on making the following draft a NETMOD working group document:

  draft-bjorklund-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams

Please send email to the list indicating "yes/support" or "no/do not support".  If indicating no, please state your reservations with the document.  If yes, please also feel free to provide comments you'd like to see addressed once the document is a WG document.


Thank you,
NETMOD WG Chairs


_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email