Re: [netmod] WG adoption poll for draft-clemm-netmod-nmda-diff-00

Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz> Fri, 05 October 2018 07:50 UTC

Return-Path: <lhotka@nic.cz>
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 04989130DE0 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 Oct 2018 00:50:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 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 0axHYDbTRyW6 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 Oct 2018 00:50:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from trail.lhotka.name (trail.lhotka.name [77.48.224.143]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A1B0130DC6 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Fri, 5 Oct 2018 00:50:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by trail.lhotka.name (Postfix, from userid 109) id 483711821139; Fri, 5 Oct 2018 09:57:17 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from localhost (unknown [195.113.220.121]) by trail.lhotka.name (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BFB161820059; Fri, 5 Oct 2018 09:57:15 +0200 (CEST)
From: Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz>
To: Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net>, Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>, Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>, "netmod\@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <8704A29D-EBAB-4AA0-B5A3-3CAC74403360@juniper.net>
References: <201810031419.w93EJNpn040188@idle.juniper.net> <20181004.121417.2190375850946168105.mbj@tail-f.com> <69afa537-9a5f-6fb6-de21-2add0ffec4b2@cisco.com> <0aa239221e80e812f920db6ae023eabc6b3ef5ed.camel@nic.cz> <ccc83277-cfa7-f363-1beb-78e801f8b675@cisco.com> <27c125fa83754c5f6723e04243f1efdaf4be8e82.camel@nic.cz> <7E46B2E3-3F12-4E08-8172-823E73E25D50@juniper.net> <20181004190754.fsu5ck5jblw5uuah@anna.jacobs.jacobs-university.de> <CABCOCHTu5ju8Qv548g+mDNioBAAuxRywZknoNO9mbUOY3MaoGw@mail.gmail.com> <8704A29D-EBAB-4AA0-B5A3-3CAC74403360@juniper.net>
Mail-Followup-To: Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net>, Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>, Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>, "netmod\@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2018 09:50:29 +0200
Message-ID: <87sh1kde7u.fsf@nic.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/XOuIfmsby7hRcNpjT3wnuLHQGSo>
Subject: Re: [netmod] WG adoption poll for draft-clemm-netmod-nmda-diff-00
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: Fri, 05 Oct 2018 07:50:35 -0000

Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net> writes:

> Sure, one mandatory to implement format, others nice to have.
> Interoperability good.  Agreed.
>
> But why YANG-patch and not something built for the purpose
> (e.g., YANG-diff) that, in particular, provides an actual diff as
> opposed to a data-tree operation that only shows one of the
> two values?

Such a format can be developed independently, I would support it.

Lada

>
> Kent // contributor
>
>
> On 10/4/18, 3:27 PM, "Andy Bierman" <andy@yumaworks.com<mailto:andy@yumaworks.com>> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 12:07 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de<mailto:j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>> wrote:
> Folks, the more formats there are, the less interoperability we
> get. If there are multiple formats, is there a mandatory to implement
> format? Does the mandatory to implement format depend on the protocol
> that is being used?
>
> I prefer one format or if necessary I am fine with one mandatory to
> implement format. An open ended collection of implementation specific
> formats is super flexible but defeats the purpose of a standard,
> namely interoperability.
>
> I agree there needs to be 1 mandatory-to-implement format.
>
> IMO this needs to be YANG Patch because it is more precise then constructing an XML tree with
> operation attributes in it (e.g., how else do you represent a delete or a move?)
> Also, YANG Push is using YANG Patch format and common code for push and diff would be
> possible.
>
> I think other formats should be allowed.
> This is very tool-specific. I could see how somebody might want
> a textual patch of the XML representation to produce the new XML representation.
>
>
> /js
>
> Andy
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 04, 2018 at 05:41:22PM +0000, Kent Watsen wrote:
>> We agree that the diff-format should be client-selectable, modulo what the server supports.  yang-patch and edit-config both are viable.  Should we document them both?
>>
>> That said, since neither edit-config nor yang-patch are diffing formats, so much as formats for converting one data tree to another, would it make sense to define an actual diffing format?  I would think that a diff would provide both values, not just a new value.
>>
>> Kent // contributor
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: netmod <netmod-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:netmod-bounces@ietf.org>> on behalf of Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz<mailto:lhotka@nic.cz>>
>> Organization: CZ.NIC
>> Date: Thursday, October 4, 2018 at 1:11 PM
>> To: Robert Wilton <rwilton@cisco.com<mailto:rwilton@cisco.com>>, "netmod@ietf.org<mailto:netmod@ietf.org>" <netmod@ietf.org<mailto:netmod@ietf.org>>
>> Subject: Re: [netmod] WG adoption poll for draft-clemm-netmod-nmda-diff-00
>>
>> On Thu, 2018-10-04 at 14:17 +0100, Robert Wilton wrote:
>> >
>> > On 04/10/2018 13:51, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>> > > On Thu, 2018-10-04 at 13:36 +0100, Robert Wilton wrote:
>> > > > On 04/10/2018 11:14, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
>> > > > > Phil Shafer <phil@juniper.net<mailto:phil@juniper.net>> wrote:
>> > > > > > Bal?zs Lengyel writes:
>> > > > > > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__tools.ietf.org_html_draft-2Dclemm-2Dnetmod-2Dnmda-2Ddiff-2D00&d=DwICAg&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=9zkP0xnJUvZGJ9EPoOH7Yhqn2gsBYaGTvjISlaJdcZo&m=7s6VdzzH9Ol3BOCbVLBarBrQ5fD0vTt8k_I2KDEN97c&s=gQWJtjc_2EF3QgRvABgZKsjqzuIw9yUq_xee6aFJOcw&e=
>> > > > > > [I've moved to a "deep lurker" role here, but ...]
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Can we ensure this model contains a "format" leaf in the RPC's input
>> > > > > > so that future (and proprietary) formats can be supported?   That
>> > > > > > leaf can be an identityref that defaults to yang-patch.
>> > > > > I think this is a good idea.  I would prefer the edit-config format
>> > > > > over YANG patch for describing a diff.  The edit-config format is more
>> > > > > suited for this purpose imo.
>> > > > +1
>> > > >
>> > > > I would like something closer to edit-config to be available via
>> > > > RESTCONF as well.
>> > > YANG Patch is IMO better because it clearly separates the target for the
>> > > edits
>> > > from the new content.
>> > > In edit-config these two are mixed together.
>> > Yes, that is primarily why I prefer the edit-config.  I perceive that it
>> > is a denser and more efficient format.  I think that it is both easier
>> > to construct (when diffing two trees) and also more efficient to apply
>> > when generating an updated tree.
>>
>> Except for certain corner cases, for example if two trees differ only in the
>> value of a single leaf but this leaf happens to be a list key.
>>
>> Lada
>>
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Rob
>> >
>> >
>> > > That being said, I support specifying format/media-type and having
>> > > potentially
>> > > multiple options.
>> > >
>> > > Lada
>> > >
>> > > > Thanks,
>> > > > Rob
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > /martin
>> > > > >
>> > > > > _______________________________________________
>> > > > > netmod mailing list
>> > > > > netmod@ietf.org<mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
>> > > > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_netmod&d=DwICAg&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=9zkP0xnJUvZGJ9EPoOH7Yhqn2gsBYaGTvjISlaJdcZo&m=7s6VdzzH9Ol3BOCbVLBarBrQ5fD0vTt8k_I2KDEN97c&s=RVJcg5pzHW-zi1OboCL4SX2huW9euHiVRSCor9n_APQ&e=
>> > > > > .
>> > > > >
>> > > > _______________________________________________
>> > > > netmod mailing list
>> > > > netmod@ietf.org<mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
>> > > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_netmod&d=DwICAg&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=9zkP0xnJUvZGJ9EPoOH7Yhqn2gsBYaGTvjISlaJdcZo&m=7s6VdzzH9Ol3BOCbVLBarBrQ5fD0vTt8k_I2KDEN97c&s=RVJcg5pzHW-zi1OboCL4SX2huW9euHiVRSCor9n_APQ&e=
>> --
>> Ladislav Lhotka
>> Head, CZ.NIC Labs
>> PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> netmod mailing list
>> netmod@ietf.org<mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_netmod&d=DwICAg&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=9zkP0xnJUvZGJ9EPoOH7Yhqn2gsBYaGTvjISlaJdcZo&m=7s6VdzzH9Ol3BOCbVLBarBrQ5fD0vTt8k_I2KDEN97c&s=RVJcg5pzHW-zi1OboCL4SX2huW9euHiVRSCor9n_APQ&e=
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> netmod mailing list
>> netmod@ietf.org<mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_netmod&d=DwMFaQ&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=9zkP0xnJUvZGJ9EPoOH7Yhqn2gsBYaGTvjISlaJdcZo&m=O7d-b9gyPvsasJo1ueKk3doDH7f5S5WQLo8_W6W3qt4&s=5LHhbfQZeoqYlC40T3mm-AEz4rSsyRWYjqTK7LuWTPw&e=>
>
> --
> 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/<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.jacobs-2Duniversity.de_&d=DwMFaQ&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=9zkP0xnJUvZGJ9EPoOH7Yhqn2gsBYaGTvjISlaJdcZo&m=O7d-b9gyPvsasJo1ueKk3doDH7f5S5WQLo8_W6W3qt4&s=zh7qEPSmwviaSqZBqG1GcqItXwI9pwyqIFVW6xC8rK8&e=>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> netmod@ietf.org<mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_netmod&d=DwMFaQ&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=9zkP0xnJUvZGJ9EPoOH7Yhqn2gsBYaGTvjISlaJdcZo&m=O7d-b9gyPvsasJo1ueKk3doDH7f5S5WQLo8_W6W3qt4&s=5LHhbfQZeoqYlC40T3mm-AEz4rSsyRWYjqTK7LuWTPw&e=>
>
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> netmod@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

-- 
Ladislav Lhotka
Head, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67