Re: [netmod] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-netmod-yang-instance-file-format-00.txt

[Ladislav Lhotka <[e-mail]>]

On Tue, 2018-11-06 at 10:41 +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> Ladislav Lhotka <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2018-11-06 at 07:36 +0100, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
> > > I agree that
> > > 
> > >         leaf datastore {
> > >           type ds:datastore-ref;
> > >           description  "The identity of the datastore for which
> > >             the instance data is documented for config=true data nodes.
> > >             The leaf MAY be absent in which case the running dtastore or
> > >             if thats not writable, the candidate datastore is implied.
> > > 
> > >             For config=false data nodes always the operational
> > >             data store is implied.";
> > >     }
> > > 
> > > is pretty confusing. It should be something like this:
> > > 
> > >         leaf datastore {
> > >           type ds:datastore-ref;
> > >           description  "The identity of the datastore holding
> > >             the instance data. If the instance data is not associated
> > 
> > Or rather the datastore that the instance data was extracted from.
> 
> I prefer "associated with".  There are other uses cases than just
> holding data "extracted from", e.g., data that is supposed to "be
> inserted into" a datastore.  "associated with" is less resrictive.

It unclear what "associated with" means in this context.

Lada

> 
> > After that,
> > the data exists on its own and the originating datastore may later be
> holding
> > something else.
> > 
> > >         with a datastore, then this leaf MUST be absent.";
> > 
> > RFC 2119 language would make sense if there is anything that could break if
> that
> > MUST isn't observed. But we even didn't know what the data is going to be
> used
> > for.
> > 
> > I would treat the "datastore" item as a purely optional information
> 
> I agree.
> 
> 
> /martin
> 
> 
> 
> > that, if
> > present, was provided for some reason. If it is false, what can we do?
> > 
> > >     }
> > > 
> > > I am against merging data from different datastores together, which
> > > the last sentence of the original text seems to imply.
> > 
> > Both config true and config false data may come from <operational>, so it
> > doesn't necessarily mean any mixing of datastores. But then again, I think
> that
> > the datastore information isn't in most cases that interesting.
> > 
> > Lada
> > 
> > > 
> > > /js
> > > 
> > > On Tue, Nov 06, 2018 at 11:51:26AM +0700, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> > > > Joe Clarke <[e-mail]> writes:
> > > > > ===
> > > > > 
> > > > > Section 6
> > > > > 
> > > > > With your datastore leaf, if I pull this off of a running YANG server,
> > > > > serialize it and share it with my customer, why wouldn't I have the
> > > > > actual datastore from which I retrieved it?  What I'm saying is that
> > > > > this element may be missing, but if it is, I don't think you can
> assume
> > > > > the source datastore for config=true nodes.
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > The description of the "datastore" leaf doesn't make much sense to
> > > > me. It says that for configuration data the default is "running" or
> > > > "candidate" if "running" isn't writable. Why should it matter whether
> > > > "running" is writable? It looks like it is assumed that the config data
> will
> > > > eventually be fed into the indicated datastore, but I don't see any
> > > > reason for such an assumption.
> > > > 
> > > > I can see that "datastore" can be occasionally useful as auxiliary
> > > > metadata but, in my view, this document addresses also instance data
> > > > that is not necessarily bound to any datastore.
> > > > 
> > > > Lada
> > > > 
> > > > -- 
> > > > Ladislav Lhotka
> > > > Head, CZ.NIC Labs
> > > > PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67
> > > > 
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > netmod mailing list
> > > > [e-mail]
> > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
> > -- 
> > Ladislav Lhotka
> > Head, CZ.NIC Labs
> > PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > netmod mailing list
> > [e-mail]
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
> > 
-- 
Ladislav Lhotka
Head, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67