Re: [netmod] review of draft-ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams-02

Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de> Mon, 30 October 2017 15:07 UTC

Return-Path: <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
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 A173313FA5F for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 Oct 2017 08:07:50 -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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 HRFxhBJYDkzL for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 Oct 2017 08:07:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from atlas5.jacobs-university.de (atlas5.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8302F13FA68 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Mon, 30 Oct 2017 08:07:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (demetrius5.irc-it.jacobs-university.de [10.70.0.222]) by atlas5.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC2D83B; Mon, 30 Oct 2017 16:07:24 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at jacobs-university.de
Received: from atlas5.jacobs-university.de ([10.70.0.217]) by localhost (demetrius5.jacobs-university.de [10.70.0.222]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id 0JZRZwjHbZNl; Mon, 30 Oct 2017 16:07:22 +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 atlas5.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Mon, 30 Oct 2017 16:07:24 +0100 (CET)
Received: from localhost (demetrius1.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.46]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94ADC2010F; Mon, 30 Oct 2017 16:07:24 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at jacobs-university.de
Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de ([212.201.44.23]) by localhost (demetrius1.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.32]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SQ3VlkE4d72m; Mon, 30 Oct 2017 16:07:24 +0100 (CET)
Received: from elstar.local (elstar.jacobs.jacobs-university.de [10.50.231.133]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0368C2010E; Mon, 30 Oct 2017 16:07:24 +0100 (CET)
Received: by elstar.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id 08FA14143AC3; Mon, 30 Oct 2017 16:05:56 +0100 (CET)
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 16:05:56 +0100
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
To: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
Cc: netmod@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20171030150556.frebbljyv26buiub@elstar.local>
Reply-To: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
Mail-Followup-To: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>, netmod@ietf.org
References: <20171029185057.hecz7vgul343tjki@elstar.local> <20171030.153656.1325329737662426135.mbj@tail-f.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20171030.153656.1325329737662426135.mbj@tail-f.com>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170714 (1.8.3)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/b2ysOJ8KsB9zPN7apv9YUYjvxWo>
Subject: Re: [netmod] review of draft-ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams-02
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, 30 Oct 2017 15:07:50 -0000

On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 03:36:56PM +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> > - Are the empty lines mandatory or can empty lines added as one sees
> >   fit? In particular, is there an empty line after the module: line?
> >   Is there an empty line before each section of different top-level
> >   symbols? Does the order of top-level symbols matter? Do we really
> >   want to specify these details? Well, for indentation, things are
> >   pretty specific so I wonder what the general strategy is here.
> 
> For indentation, spaces a specified b/c they matter (ok, we *could*
> specify some more flexible indentation rules).  Blank line do not
> matter.  Do you think we should say something about this?

I would hope that nobody ever comes up with the idea of writing
programs to parse tree diagrams, hence I am fine with a rather liberal
definition (and I also do not care about the exact number of spaces
but I if it helps to describe the indentation rules then OK).

> > - I think Section 4.1 is not about representing _instance_ data
> >   trees. It is describing how a schema mounted schema looks like - and
> >   I think this is OK. I think this document should not specify
> >   instance tree formats. So change the title of section 4.1 or simply
> >   delete the subsection title entirely.
> 
> I agree.  How about "Representation of Mounted Data Trees"?

Isn't is a mounted schema tree?

> > - If a schema mount point is used for a readonly mount, then I
> >   understand that only the toplevel changes to ro. Is this useful or
> >   potentially misleading? Was the alternative considered to change all
> >   nodes recursively to ro? I assume they are all effectively ro in
> >   this case.
> 
> Hmm, I'll check w/ my co-author.  I think it should be changed
> recursively.
 
> > - If the WG wants to include tree diagram usage guidelines in this
> >   document, then I think we should (if we still manage) take tree
> >   diagram related text out of 6087bis before it is cast into
> >   stone. Changes to 6087bis would be:
> > 
> >   - Change the subsubstitle "2.5.1.  YANG Tree Diagrams" to "2.6.
> >     YANG Tree Diagrams" (since the definition is in an external
> >     document, I think this should not be nested in 2.5 anymore).
> > 
> >   - Remove section 3.4.
> > 
> >   - Remove this from section 8 (which is not quite correct anymore
> >     anyway since the definition moved to a separate document).
> > 
> >        o  Added YANG tree diagram definition and guideline
> > 
> >   Since two are bug fixes anyway (I think), I think it makes sense to
> >   get 6087bis fixed so that the tree diagram usage text is in one
> >   place.
> 
> I have no strong opinion, but I think I prefer to have the guidelines
> for tree diagrams in the tree diagram draft.  Maybe 6087 can point to
> this document.

RFC 6087bis would still point to the tree diagram if you apply the
edits above but it would no do anything more than that.

/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/>