IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [netmod] kw comments on draft-voit-netmod-yang-mount-requirements

"Eric Voit (evoit)" <evoit@cisco.com> Fri, 08 April 2016 13:32 UTC

Return-Path: <evoit@cisco.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 2759712D8BE for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Apr 2016 06:32:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.531
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.531 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
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 XbA_PXxrI822 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Apr 2016 06:32:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com [173.37.86.79]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7588412D8AB for <netmod@ietf.org>; Fri, 8 Apr 2016 06:32:38 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1175; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1460122358; x=1461331958; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=OzPjInnm+uApJVOSrq/wtceqe8WFC4EZWntB85LSkDc=; b=mPliHDjfwmYC0Fjr4mrJiaJDnHyb8xiE+JywRiIbWsVr9H6ju1fZ4wnE 7T731jVwRBCr4nnIFDqs4LHLAfiSYcm1XqoCSM5ugHbjgwPdXhFvwgKHX FE5Euz4w/gkf93rOX25tLbbbaZfPG/ndZ8x2OA7xXMMzhCJICb7YMzwsd s=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0D+AQDzsQdX/4wNJK1ZA4M3U4EDuj8BDYFzHYVwAoE0OBQBAQEBAQEBZSeEQQEBAQMBOj8FCQICAQgOAgUDHhAbFyUCBA4NiBcIwFQBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEVBIYdhEuEYCaFDwWYBAGOBI8UjyQBHgEBQoNniSd+AQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.24,449,1454976000"; d="scan'208";a="89666925"
Received: from alln-core-7.cisco.com ([173.36.13.140]) by rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 08 Apr 2016 13:32:37 +0000
Received: from XCH-RTP-001.cisco.com (xch-rtp-001.cisco.com [64.101.220.141]) by alln-core-7.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u38DWas5026443 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 8 Apr 2016 13:32:36 GMT
Received: from xch-rtp-013.cisco.com (64.101.220.153) by XCH-RTP-001.cisco.com (64.101.220.141) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Fri, 8 Apr 2016 09:32:35 -0400
Received: from xch-rtp-013.cisco.com ([64.101.220.153]) by XCH-RTP-013.cisco.com ([64.101.220.153]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Fri, 8 Apr 2016 09:32:35 -0400
From: "Eric Voit (evoit)" <evoit@cisco.com>
To: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
Thread-Topic: [netmod] kw comments on draft-voit-netmod-yang-mount-requirements
Thread-Index: AQHRjx7t1dIqVaLFu0y/L6aVF65SwZ9/UkiggACacwCAACUOQA==
Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2016 13:32:35 +0000
Message-ID: <c41c4265f9654e4984b977e1ed4fa9a2@XCH-RTP-013.cisco.com>
References: <51F6361D-5F32-449F-80D6-26A4B3569DC1@juniper.net> <20160405.113822.1614298419822308565.mbj@tail-f.com> <a56bf1df63ef47e7a7d96ba78146703e@XCH-RTP-013.cisco.com> <20160408065748.GA66159@elstar.local>
In-Reply-To: <20160408065748.GA66159@elstar.local>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.24.76.129]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/j9QOH9ff1reAOyhhDXHqHCuCd2A>
Cc: "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [netmod] kw comments on draft-voit-netmod-yang-mount-requirements
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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, 08 Apr 2016 13:32:40 -0000

> From: Juergen Schoenwaelder, April 08, 2016 2:58 AM
> 
> On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 02:20:19AM +0000, Eric Voit (evoit) wrote:
> > My thinking matches more closely to what Kent lays out above:
> >
> > schema-mount
> > data-mount
> > remote data mount   (a.k.a. peer mount)
> > local data mount        (a.k.a. alias mount)
> >
> > The value in the term "yang mount" is that it provides a conceptual umbrella to
> ensure a cohesive syntax across the four valid permutations of the above.  The
> term itself was never intended to be implementable.
> >
> 
> So why do we need 'local data mount' (aka 'alias mount')? Which problem does
> it solve that 'peer mounting' localhost does not solve?

To me it comes down to ease of use for the developer. If the system only allows mounting localhost, why require that parameter in the syntax?   That parameter shouldn't even be available/visible for entry. 

Eric

> /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/>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email