Re: [netmod] xpath expressions in JSON

Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com> Tue, 23 October 2018 02:12 UTC

Return-Path: <bill.wu@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 B8A4A130DEE for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 19:12:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 cyBnQdDQCn6s for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 19:12:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [185.176.76.210]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AF057130DE0 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 19:12:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhreml705-cah.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.108]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id B6C96F1130531; Tue, 23 Oct 2018 03:12:06 +0100 (IST)
Received: from NKGEML412-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.98.56.73) by lhreml705-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.46) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Tue, 23 Oct 2018 03:12:07 +0100
Received: from NKGEML513-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.1.10]) by nkgeml412-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.98.56.73]) with mapi id 14.03.0415.000; Tue, 23 Oct 2018 10:12:01 +0800
From: Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com>
To: Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz>, Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
CC: "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [netmod] xpath expressions in JSON
Thread-Index: AQHUYIq7R7zgxnWZykmBF8fDuM0qB6UX5bGAgAAV+YCAAMlcgIAABpwAgABHYACAAC1hgIAAEM2AgAAGGwCAAAHbgIAAB16AgABShQCAAAlqgIABCfeAgAmNmgCAAWuAgIAFBnmAgAAETwCAAVkTsA==
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2018 02:12:00 +0000
Message-ID: <B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABA9B0BC6A0@nkgeml513-mbx.china.huawei.com>
References: <20181012.103727.731509761734796510.mbj@tail-f.com> <20181018.123036.731934458688841323.mbj@tail-f.com> <87bm7q4apy.fsf@nic.cz> <20181022.145605.1533686864301630023.mbj@tail-f.com> <c65c0eaf9054242c5378f50c001789a84b3007c2.camel@nic.cz>
In-Reply-To: <c65c0eaf9054242c5378f50c001789a84b3007c2.camel@nic.cz>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.138.33.244]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/RDlxDNqgIFLZIfzQXmzeGWb67Hw>
Subject: Re: [netmod] xpath expressions in JSON
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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, 23 Oct 2018 02:12:12 -0000

-----邮件原件-----
发件人: netmod [mailto:netmod-bounces@ietf.org] 代表 Ladislav Lhotka
发送时间: 2018年10月22日 21:12
收件人: Martin Bjorklund
抄送: netmod@ietf.org
主题: Re: [netmod] xpath expressions in JSON

On Mon, 2018-10-22 at 14:56 +0200, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz> wrote:
> > Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com> writes:
> > 
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Going back to the most urgent issue, what is this WG's 
> > > recommendation for the subscribed-notifications draft in NETCONF 
> > > wrt/ their usage of
> > > yang:xpath1.0 in filters?
> > >
> > > To summarize:
> > >
> > > We already have
> > >
> > >   o  instance-identifier in XML uses prefixes from the XML document
> > >   o  instance-identifier in JSON uses module names as prefixes
> > >   o  XPath in NETCONF filter uses prefixes from the XML document
> > >   o  XPath in JSON query filter uses module names as prefixes
> > >
> > >
> > > Alternative A:
> > > --------------
> > >
> > > Use different encodings for "stream-xpath-filter" as well, 
> > > depending on if it is XML or JSON.
> > >
> > > We would do in SN:
> > >
> > >     o  If the node is encoded in XML, the set of namespace
> > >        declarations are those in scope on the
> > >        'stream-xpath-filter' leaf element.
> > >
> > >     o  If the node is encoded in JSON, the set of namespace
> > >        declarations is the set of prefix and namespace pairs
> > >        for all supported YANG modules, where the prefix is
> > 
> > Is "supported" the same as "implemented", or something else?
> 
> It should be "implemented".
> 
> > >        the YANG module name and the namespace is as defined
> > >        by the "namespace" statement in the YANG module.
> > >
> > > Pro: the format is consistent within each encoding.
> > >
> > > Con: unclear how to handle other encodings.
> > > Con: we keep using context-depending encodings.
> > 
> >   Con: XPath expressions in JSON can get pretty long (I assume it's not
> >   just an instance identifier but may contain predicates etc.). We
> >   cannot use the trick with the default namespace as in YANG, so all
> >   data node names will have to carry the prefix.
> 
> Yes.
> 
> > > We could probably add that CBOR uses the same representation as JSON.
> > >
> > > Example in XML:
> > >
> > >   <stream-xpath-filter
> > >       xmlns:if="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-interfaces"
> > >       xmlns:ip="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-ip">
> > >     /if:interfaces/if:interface/ip:ipv4
> > >   </stream-xpath-filter>
> > >
> > > Example in JSON:
> > >
> > >   "stream-xpath-filter":
> > >     "/ietf-interfaces:interfaces/ietf-interfaces:interface/ietf-ip:ipv4"
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Alternative B:
> > > --------------
> > >
> > > Use a non-context depending encoding, with the module name as prefix.
> > >
> > > We would do in SN:
> > >
> > >     o  The set of namespace
> > >        declarations is the set of prefix and namespace pairs
> > >        for all supported YANG modules, where the prefix is
> > >        the YANG module name and the namespace is as defined
> > >        by the "namespace" statement in the YANG module.
> > >
> > > Pro: the format is independent from the protocol encoding
> > >
> > > Con: in XML, this leaf is treated differently from other XPath
> > >      expressions, such as get-config filter and nacm rules.
> > >
> > > Example in XML:
> > >
> > >   <stream-xpath-filter>
> > >     /ietf-interfaces:interfaces/ietf-interfaces:interface/ietf-ip:ipv4
> > >   </stream-xpath-filter>
> > >
> > > Example in JSON:
> > >
> > >   "stream-xpath-filter":
> > >     "/ietf-interfaces:interfaces/ietf-interfaces:interface/ietf-ip:ipv4"
> > >
> > >
> > > My proposal is A.  I think it is more important with consistency 
> > > within each encoding than across encodings.
> > 
> > I would suggest to consider declaring prefixes & namespaces 
> > explicitly in the data, as in the schema mount document. It is 
> > independent of encoding and the expressions can be kept short. In 
> > fact, one of the namespaces can be declared as default, so this use 
> > of XPath would then be very similar to YANG.
> 
> Ok, so this is another alternative that works today, and achieves the 
> goal of being encoding-independent.  It is still context-dependent 
> though.

Yes, every module that uses XPath in data will have to deal with this. There may potentially be multiple independent prefix declarations (this is actually a con). 

> 
> BTW, when used in filters, it is nice to let an unprefixed name to 
> match any namespace; i.e., treat "foo" as syntactic sugar for
> "local-name(.) = 'foo'".  ("*:foo" is not legal...)

Hmm, I think this is a bad idea because it departs even further from the original XPath semantics. Such chameleon names should IMO be pretty rare, and if they are needed, local-name() is always available.

[Qin]: Agree with Lada, Referencing RFC8407, section 4.6.2, I think the below guideline is relevant.
"
The "local-name" function SHOULD NOT be used to reference local names
   outside of the YANG module that defines the must or when expression
   containing the "local-name" function.  Example of a "local-name"
   function that should not be used:

      /*[local-name()='foo']

"
Lada

> 
> 
> /martin
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > 
> > Lada
> > 
> > >
> > > (This said, I would like to have a context-independent encoding of 
> > > all YANG types in the future.  But not now.)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > /martin
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > netmod mailing list
> > > netmod@ietf.org
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
> > 
> > --
> > Ladislav Lhotka
> > Head, CZ.NIC Labs
> > PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67
> > 
--
Ladislav Lhotka
Head, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67

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