Re: [netmod] [Netconf] LC on YANG Library (bis)

[Mahesh Jethanandani <[e-mail]>]

This officially closes the LC on YANG Library bis draft. I know that separately there has been a YANG Doctors review of this draft.

Authors, please post an updated draft addressing the comments received during LC and other reviews on the document. I will then do a shepherd’s writeup and send it for publication.

Thanks.

Mahesh //as shepherd

> On Feb 16, 2018, at 8:04 AM, Robert Wilton <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 16/02/2018 15:33, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>> Robert Wilton <[e-mail]> writes:
>> 
>>> Hi Lada,
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 16/02/2018 09:06, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>>>> Robert Wilton <[e-mail]> writes:
>>>> 
>>>>> I should add, as a contributor, I have read this document and think that
>>>>> is ready for advancement.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I have three minor comments:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 1) module "feature" in YANG library is a leaf-list, but currently it is
>>>>> a list in YANG libary bis. I suspect that this is due to one of the
>>>>> incarnations when it contained additional information.  I think that we
>>>>> should revert it back to being a leaf list for consistency.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 2) Lada recommended that module "deviation" be made a leaf-list. I also
>>>>> support changing this for consistency with "feature" above, but don't
>>>>> feel too strongly on this one.
>>>> I agree to have both as leaf-lists.
>>>> 
>>>>> 3) I think the "modules" list is also allowed to included modules that
>>>>> don't actually contain any nodes that require implementation.  Hence, it
>>>>> might be useful of the "modules" description statement explicitly stated
>>>>> this.  I.e. perhaps something like:
>>>>> 
>>>>> "This list may contain modules that do not contain any schema nodes that
>>>>> require implementation.  For example, it could contain a module that
>>>>> only defines types and not any data nodes, RPCs, actions, notifications,
>>>>> or deviations."
>>>> Hmm, such modules belong to the other list "import-only-modules", don't
>>>> they?
>>> So my reasoning is that either is valid.
>>> 
>>> I.e. a module being listed under "modules" means that it implements all
>>> data nodes, RPCs, actions, notifications, deviations, etc.  If a module
>>> doesn't contain any data nodes, RPCs, actions, notifications,
>>> deviations, etc then it is trivially implemented :-)
>> OK, so if a module contains only groupings and typedefs, it can appear
>> either in "modules" or in "import-only-modules", and the effect is the
>> same, right?
> Yes.
> 
>> 
>> This sounds reasonable.
>> 
>>> As an aside, RFC 7950 states in 5.6.5:
>>> 
>>>   A server implements a module if it implements the module's data
>>>     nodes, RPCs, actions, notifications, and deviations.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I wonder whether identities shouldn't also be on this list, since
>>> section 9.10.2 states:
>> Yes, and extensions as well.
>> 
>> Lada
> Thanks,
> Rob
> 
>> 
>>> On a particular server, the valid values are further restricted
>>> to the set of identities defined in the modules implemented by the server.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Rob
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> Lada
>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Rob
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 02/02/2018 13:51, Kent Watsen wrote:
>>>>>> As co-author, I am not aware of any IPR related to this document.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> As a contributor, I have read this document and think that it is ready
>>>>>> for advancement.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Kent
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 2/2/18, 4:30 AM, "Netconf on behalf of Robert Wilton"
>>>>>> <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> on behalf
>>>>>> of [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I am not aware of any IPR related to this document.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Rob
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 01/02/2018 18:59, Mahesh Jethanandani wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>      WG,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>      The authors of rfc7895bis have indicated that they believe the
>>>>>>      document is ready for LC[1].
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>      This starts a two week LC on the draft
>>>>>>      <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__tools.ietf.org_html_draft-2Dietf-2Dnetconf-2Drfc7895bis-2D04&d=DwMD-g&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=9zkP0xnJUvZGJ9EPoOH7Yhqn2gsBYaGTvjISlaJdcZo&m=fi_opjj4kio7eufRXSQSi8dSjJNlkVDo8a1F0zsCrfE&s=MqbVljnYqIk9w78kcfp7oUqGR-qVoNV90njyTwLAdpc&e=>.
>>>>>>      The LC will end on February 15.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>      Please send your comments on this thread. Reviews of the document,
>>>>>>      and statement of support are particularly helpful to the authors.
>>>>>>      If you have concerns about the document, please state those too.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>      Authors please indicate if you are aware of any IPR on the document.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>      Thanks.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>      [1]
>>>>>>      https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netconf/current/msg13980.html
>>>>>>      <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mail-2Darchive_web_netconf_current_msg13980.html&d=DwMD-g&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=9zkP0xnJUvZGJ9EPoOH7Yhqn2gsBYaGTvjISlaJdcZo&m=fi_opjj4kio7eufRXSQSi8dSjJNlkVDo8a1F0zsCrfE&s=XhRSSTWifO-SkPi2CWK5Z5aUni2F1qRQ8Moj7T7gI-Y&e=>
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>      Mahesh & Kent
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>      _______________________________________________
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>      Netconf mailing list
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>      [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>      https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf
>>>>>>      <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_netconf&d=DwMD-g&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=9zkP0xnJUvZGJ9EPoOH7Yhqn2gsBYaGTvjISlaJdcZo&m=fi_opjj4kio7eufRXSQSi8dSjJNlkVDo8a1F0zsCrfE&s=mcDF-v5I4epgsuWLHvr32pZ5mRonROKN8zpKcZWBC0o&e=>
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Netconf mailing list
>>>>> [e-mail]
>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Netconf mailing list
>>> [e-mail]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf