Re: [netmod] Comment on draft-clacla-netmod-yang-model-update-02

Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com> Wed, 15 November 2017 13:20 UTC

Return-Path: <mbj@tail-f.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 49658126DCA for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 05:20:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 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 N5vdkp5FiA_d for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 05:20:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.tail-f.com (mail.tail-f.com [46.21.102.45]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34C43124B17 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 05:20:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (h-40-225.A165.priv.bahnhof.se [94.254.40.225]) by mail.tail-f.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7617E1AE0311; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 14:20:17 +0100 (CET)
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 14:20:17 +0100
Message-Id: <20171115.142017.1071562845381546650.mbj@tail-f.com>
To: lhotka@nic.cz
Cc: netmod@ietf.org
From: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
In-Reply-To: <1510751195.21877.25.camel@nic.cz>
References: <55fcf67e-6e27-4bd9-cdd6-62f3fbe11bff@ericsson.com> <20171115.121716.454716475078719607.mbj@tail-f.com> <1510751195.21877.25.camel@nic.cz>
X-Mailer: Mew version 6.7 on Emacs 24.5 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/dQ0_U-Wv887WDzjxAYFjZrsyHfI>
Subject: Re: [netmod] Comment on draft-clacla-netmod-yang-model-update-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: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 13:20:21 -0000

Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz> wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-11-15 at 12:17 +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> > Balazs Lengyel <balazs.lengyel@ericsson.com> wrote:
> > > The server MAY implement obsoleted nodes or MAY NOT. This may or may
> > > not  is not good enough as a contract for the management client.  My
> > > problem is that the current solution is just not good enough. IMHO we
> > > need to change it.
> > 
> > Note that if a server implements version 1 of a module, and then the
> > module doesn't change, but the server in the next sw version drops
> > support for the module, the client will also be unhappy.  We (the
> > IETF) can't have rules for these kinds of things.
> 
> If the server drops support for a module, then that module has to disappear from
> YANG library, so it is a priori known that it happened. With deprecated/obsolete
> nodes, a server may drop their support without any notice, within the same
> module&revision. 

I agree that *that* is a problem, but that's not what Balazs asked about.


/martin

> > > new stuff with a new name, although that might not be the common
> > > practice.  Which is a good thing, as I believe it is sometimes better
> > > to correct existing definitions then to replace them.
> > 
> > But you still want to require servers to implement even obsolete
> > nodes?
> 
> I think with semver support there will be no need for the "status" statement -
> the nodes just get removed and version number bumped.
> 
> Lada
> 
> > 
> > 
> > /martin
> > 
> > 
> > > 
> > > regards Balazs
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On 2017-11-15 16:53, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> > > > Exactly.  With the current solution, the sever can still implement the
> > > > deprecated or obsolete nodes in order to support old clients.
> > > > 
> > > > With a MAJOR update in a semver world, it means that the old nodes are
> > > > removed (or rather, possibly, that the old nodes have new syntax
> > > > and/or semantics).
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > -- 
> > > Balazs Lengyel                       Ericsson Hungary Ltd.
> > > Senior Specialist
> > > Mobile: +36-70-330-7909 email: Balazs.Lengyel@ericsson.com
> > > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>