Re: [netmod] schema mount and YANG library

"Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com> Mon, 22 January 2018 16:58 UTC

Return-Path: <acee@cisco.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 5687A1273B1 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Jan 2018 08:58:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.531
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.531 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
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 j_i9IolQzHj4 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Jan 2018 08:58:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com [173.37.86.74]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D137412778E for <netmod@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Jan 2018 08:58:17 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=6536; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1516640297; x=1517849897; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=jO4OT40nEQ/YO+En47HXWaql7hg6cY7Ers4+BMmay1E=; b=OZ1uY+zUgMtgjacMDQt6FdDFa9BjUboa5u4KCN2tzZ/X45zsU0IvsMpc YNCiQjMKLCgjLq+u4sS+YJ+1gJzSDBtanrF8O9V5SJUVuLH9eT3OKdEIY vcfYVG3ylDGssbu1I/E07ewlny328JRY+uk5fNe7MRBCqk5g3v2+6b/4m o=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0DhAgDKF2Za/5JdJa1bAxkBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEHAQEBAQGDQmZ0JweDVookjjA1ggKXPoIXChgNhEdPAhqEVj8YAQEBAQEBAQEBayiFJAEBBAEBIRE6Cw4CAgEIDgIIAgImAgICGQwLFRACBA4FG4oYELR+gieKLwEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARgFBYEKgzqCFYM/KQyCeYJRXgEBAoIGCiaCUDGCNAWjegKIEY1IghuSBIp1glyJSQIRGQGBOwEfOYFQbxU9KgGBf4RXeIlTgRcBAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.46,397,1511827200"; d="scan'208";a="335902364"
Received: from rcdn-core-10.cisco.com ([173.37.93.146]) by rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 22 Jan 2018 16:58:16 +0000
Received: from XCH-RTP-009.cisco.com (xch-rtp-009.cisco.com [64.101.220.149]) by rcdn-core-10.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w0MGwGQ0017617 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 22 Jan 2018 16:58:16 GMT
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com (64.101.220.155) by XCH-RTP-009.cisco.com (64.101.220.149) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1320.4; Mon, 22 Jan 2018 11:58:15 -0500
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) by XCH-RTP-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) with mapi id 15.00.1320.000; Mon, 22 Jan 2018 11:58:15 -0500
From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>
To: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
CC: Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz>, "Robert Wilton -X (rwilton - ENSOFT LIMITED at Cisco)" <rwilton@cisco.com>, "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [netmod] schema mount and YANG library
Thread-Index: AQHTjpmkXZcjBoxLfUed9b6huAMBJ6OAd0qA//+v6QA=
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 16:58:15 +0000
Message-ID: <CA9BF0DE-4E26-4C5A-9191-B23BF976A4CD@cisco.com>
References: <16104ca0948.27d3.9b4188e636579690ba6c69f2c8a0f1fd@labn.net> <20180117.171817.479473055872371790.mbj@tail-f.com> <1516206873.1388.68.camel@nic.cz> <20180117.174039.2105430212248651483.mbj@tail-f.com> <1827bdbb-a1ef-4302-bbb1-c0a3078de85a@cisco.com> <20180122111318.d7riglic333nj7ki@elstar.local> <878tcqm2gv.fsf@nic.cz> <E0051801-0D8B-4A65-9B4C-0E5387176249@cisco.com> <20180122164457.megfkkubdowexa7e@elstar.local>
In-Reply-To: <20180122164457.megfkkubdowexa7e@elstar.local>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.116.152.198]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <9788AC829869F84E885B937A4901A20F@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/Rqyc5VxARQncD-IRbL8_ppI02ds>
Subject: Re: [netmod] schema mount and YANG library
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: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 16:58:24 -0000

It was WG Last Call’ed: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/csUvs6408En0yY-vapyU3IFcJqQ

And it was closed: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/gbXE4Le1I_3Y5oaNnpjYoZZZ4lw

However, it may not have ever completed.

Thanks,
Acee 

On 1/22/18, 11:45 AM, "Juergen Schoenwaelder" <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de> wrote:

    Acee,
    
    the documents that have already finished WG Last Call have a normative
    reference on schema mount, which has not yet finished WG Last Call as
    far as I recall. I think the RFC editor does not publish a document
    with a missing normative reference. I continue to believe that the
    time difference between doing the right thing and doing something
    faster using definition we are in the process to deprecate is really
    small. But of course, I may be entirely wrong.
    
    /js
    
    On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 04:18:15PM +0000, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote:
    > Hi Lada, 
    > 
    > My primary concern is that the YANG Schema Mount delay will not only hold the NI/LNE but all the models that are dependent on them (e.g., L2VPN and L3VPN). This is for a document that has already finished WG Last Call. Additionally, your estimate for the size of the change and time to reach standardization is based on there being immediate consensus on the changes. This is probably overly optimistic given there was discussion on the proposed YANG Library BIS changes. I’d vote to publish the existing draft. 
    > 
    > In any case, being able to see the proposed changes ASAP is critical. 
    > 
    > Thanks,
    > Acee
    > 
    > On 1/22/18, 8:45 AM, "netmod on behalf of Ladislav Lhotka" <netmod-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of lhotka@nic.cz> wrote:
    > 
    >     Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de> writes:
    >     
    >     > On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 06:05:15PM +0000, Robert Wilton wrote:
    >     >> 
    >     >> Hence, for me, I see the choice as:
    >     >> 1) do we publish the existing model now (perhaps also mark the draft as
    >     >> experimental) followed by an updated draft with the NMDA compatible module?
    >     >> 2) do we publish both models in a single draft (e.g. with the existing model
    >     >> in an appendix)?
    >     >> 3) do we only publish a single version of the draft with an NMDA compliant
    >     >> solution.
    >     >>
    >     >
    >     > I think the situation is as follows (likely obvious but it may help to
    >     > make sure we are all on the same page):
    >     >
    >     > - the NI and LNE models have a normative reference to
    >     >   I-D.ietf-netmod-schema-mount (and this makes sense since there are
    >     >   MUST sentences in the I-D)
    >     >
    >     > - I-D.ietf-netmod-schema-mount (last updated in October) has normative
    >     >   references to RFC 7895 (old YANG library)
    >     >
    >     > - RFC 7895 does not work with NMDA, NMDA work on a YANG library update
    >     >   replacing RFC 7895
    >     >
    >     > So the YANG library update is gating the schema mount update which is
    >     > gating the publication of the NI and LNE models.
    >     >
    >     > A proper solution would be to prioritize work on the YANG library
    >     > update and the schema mount update. I assume that the next revision of
    >     > the YANG library update (say end of January) is ready for WG last call
    >     > and perhaps the schema mount authors can take an effort to get that
    >     > document there as well, say beginning of February.
    >     
    >     I completely agree.
    >     
    >     Lada
    >     
    >     >
    >     > /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/>
    >     >
    >     > _______________________________________________
    >     > netmod mailing list
    >     > netmod@ietf.org
    >     > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
    >     
    >     -- 
    >     Ladislav Lhotka
    >     Head, CZ.NIC Labs
    >     PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67
    >     
    >     _______________________________________________
    >     netmod mailing list
    >     netmod@ietf.org
    >     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
    >     
    > 
    
    -- 
    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/>