Re: [netmod] schema mount and YANG library

Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> Thu, 18 January 2018 12:58 UTC

Return-Path: <lberger@labn.net>
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 D7AB012D94C for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Jan 2018 04:58:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.902
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (768-bit key) header.d=labn.net
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 eBYPHBNvlydr for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Jan 2018 04:58:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gproxy9-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com (gproxy9-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com [69.89.20.122]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2FD111201FA for <netmod@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Jan 2018 04:58:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from CMOut01 (unknown [10.0.90.82]) by gproxy9.mail.unifiedlayer.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E48981E0690 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Jan 2018 05:58:13 -0700 (MST)
Received: from box313.bluehost.com ([69.89.31.113]) by CMOut01 with id zoyA1w0062SSUrH01oyDUF; Thu, 18 Jan 2018 05:58:13 -0700
X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.2 cv=Rf/gMxlv c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=h1BC+oY+fLhyFmnTBx92Jg==:117 a=h1BC+oY+fLhyFmnTBx92Jg==:17 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=RgaUWeydRksA:10 a=u07AKapRAAAA:8 a=wU2YTnxGAAAA:8 a=B3I4fpRw_GwwlhMKXCEA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=SkebfZ6J2Mmvk2rLHZle:22 a=Yz9wTY_ffGCQnEDHKrcv:22
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=labn.net; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:MIME-Version:Subject: References:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:Date:CC:To:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=Vc5GtEy9cs7bkbp0PUNWoM5MRsukcLS8VE+PqTu3fT4=; b=f9UdIJnbnnswT9S8Q0P5u/h/Bp wIi09y6tW33l2woU8ealx9hNFPir7JYzaiaeyAhe+RcnQx1Uzrfn9s/+ZVXq8cYWuWD0VDOvxmELG 4MnRWThudr/XQXR2pnFRkwTpB;
Received: from pool-100-15-86-101.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([100.15.86.101]:55326 helo=[11.4.0.163]) by box313.bluehost.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.89_1) (envelope-from <lberger@labn.net>) id 1ec9lh-000cPw-TV; Thu, 18 Jan 2018 05:58:10 -0700
From: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
To: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
CC: rwilton@cisco.com, netmod@ietf.org
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 07:58:07 -0500
Message-ID: <16109590f18.27d3.9b4188e636579690ba6c69f2c8a0f1fd@labn.net>
In-Reply-To: <20180118.085648.2091191419931632376.mbj@tail-f.com>
References: <16104ca0948.27d3.9b4188e636579690ba6c69f2c8a0f1fd@labn.net> <20180117.171817.479473055872371790.mbj@tail-f.com> <5d8b65cf-e75e-e11e-a41a-722697ec3af8@labn.net> <20180118.085648.2091191419931632376.mbj@tail-f.com>
User-Agent: AquaMail/1.13.2-730 (build: 101300200)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - box313.bluehost.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - labn.net
X-BWhitelist: no
X-Source-IP: 100.15.86.101
X-Exim-ID: 1ec9lh-000cPw-TV
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-Source-Sender: pool-100-15-86-101.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([11.4.0.163]) [100.15.86.101]:55326
X-Source-Auth: lberger@labn.net
X-Email-Count: 5
X-Source-Cap: bGFibm1vYmk7bGFibm1vYmk7Ym94MzEzLmJsdWVob3N0LmNvbQ==
X-Local-Domain: yes
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/l-ko1SAprq-7Ku1s5Zlnol-6cfU>
Subject: Re: [netmod] schema mount and YANG library
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: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 12:58:16 -0000

Martin,

I do agree with that at some point we will need to revisit scheme mount in 
the context of YL-bis, as there are different possible solutions for 
handling different datastores mounting  different schema. I think Rob laid 
out the options pretty well here, ie doing it now or publishing as is and 
immediately working on the document that covers both.

As I mentioned before I think this is as much a process issue as anything 
else - and have a planned call to discuss possible directions with chairs. 
I hope we can have some propose next steps on this to the working group in 
short order.

Lou


On January 18, 2018 2:57:23 AM Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com> wrote:

> Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 1/17/2018 11:18 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
>> ...
>> >>> My main concern is actually the YL version.  I strongly think SM need
>> >>> to use YL-bis rather that the old YL, so that it can support NMDA.
>> >>>
>> >> Right now to SM is independent of Yang Library version and can run
>> >> with either.
>> > No this is not correct.  SM uses a grouping from the old YANG
>> > library (for the "use-schema" case),
>> I thought YLbis was an updat e to UL (i.e., no name change) as such SM
>> can include either.
>
> The old "modules-state" structure is deprecated, and a new structure
> that allows multiple datastores is defined.  Note that YLbis can be
> used by both NMDA-capabale and non-NMDA-capabale servers.
>
>> >   and talks about mounting
>> > "modules-state" ("inline" case).
>> In informative descriptions only.  Certainly these can be changed to
>> allow for YL-bis if need be.
>>
>> >> I certainly would expect use of Yang Library bis and nmda
>> >> to have advantages.
>> >>
>> >>> The implementation effort for supporting the new YL in clients and
>> >>> servers is minimal, esp. when compared to the efforts involved in
>> >>> supporting SM.
>> >>>
>> >>> Adding an indirection is (for me) less important, but it has the
>> >>> benefit of solving the two issues (a) and (b) above, and I haven't
>> >>> seen any technical problem with it.
>> >>>
>> >> (A) has implementation implications and those participating in the
>> >> discussion at the time expressed as not being worth the cost.
>> >> I don't believe b was seen as a significant issue either.
>> >>
>> >>> Do you have any technical concerns with using an annotation as an
>> >>> indirection?
>> >>>
>> >> The technicsl issue I have with the approaches the same one that was
>> >> raised when debated previously, ie the implementation overhead of
>> >> requiring inline schemas to be available at the top level.
>> > Ok.  I'm ok with keeping the inline case as it is.  However, I think
>> > we need to use the new YL-bis, so that we can support the NMDA.
>> Given that NMDA support is not yet fully defined, we're still in the
>> transition period where support for both NMDA and non-NMDA
>> implementations need to be considered.  Rob presented some options
>> earlier in the thread that I think captures this.
>
> Again, note that YLbis supports both NMDA and non-NMDA servers.
>
> Also note that YLbis is just a different read-only monitoring
> structure.  Given an implementation that supports the old YL, it is
> trivial to add support for YLbis (especially compared to the more than
> non-trivial amount of work required to support schema mount...).
>
>
> /martin
>