Re: [netmod] Comments on schema mount draft
Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com> Mon, 26 March 2018 08:11 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 DEDAF1252BA for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Mar 2018 01:11:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.911
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.911 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 VaJS3pURRtZd for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Mar 2018 01:11:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.tail-f.com (mail.tail-f.com [46.21.102.45]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B4041205F0 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Mar 2018 01:11:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (unknown [173.38.220.45]) by mail.tail-f.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BEF821AE0187; Mon, 26 Mar 2018 10:11:29 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2018 10:11:29 +0200
Message-Id: <20180326.101129.936165036878075905.mbj@tail-f.com>
To: rohitrranade@outlook.com
Cc: netmod@ietf.org
From: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
In-Reply-To: <HK2PR0401MB12659DDADA1E5DAE6EE5AFA3DBAE0@HK2PR0401MB1265.apcprd04.prod.outlook.com>
References: <HK2PR0401MB12659DDADA1E5DAE6EE5AFA3DBAE0@HK2PR0401MB1265.apcprd04.prod.outlook.com>
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/nlVzdU6EyXK_Tr8I0Bm6XeJ_-2s>
Subject: Re: [netmod] Comments on schema mount draft
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: Mon, 26 Mar 2018 08:11:32 -0000
Hi, Thank you for these comments, replies inline. Rohit Ranade <rohitrranade@outlook.com> wrote: > Hi All, > > Please find some comments for the schema mount draft. If I find any > other will send in another mail. > > Editorial: > ============ > 1. Section 3.1 > "The "mount-point" statement MUST NOT be used in a YANG version 1 > module." > ==> It is unclear why such a restriction is placed. The reason is that YANG 1 doesn't support inline actions and notification, which means that top-level rpcs and notifs in the mounted module cannot be invoked using the mechanism described in section 5. I will try to clarify this. > 2. Section 3.2 > "state data in the "yangmnt:schema-mounts"" > ==> Here the yang tree diagram is not yet introduced. I feel better to > introduce > this diagram as it makes it easier to understand the data-nodes Ok. I moved section 8 to a new section 3.2. > 3. Section 3.2 > "Data in this container is intended to be as stable as data in the > top-level YANG library" > ==> What is the meaning of "as stable" as ? As a developer , I am > unclear what needs > to be done here. Please clarify. Kent also had a comment around this, and the text about stable is now removed. > 4. Section 3.2 > "i.e., instances of that mount point MUST NOT contain any data above > those that are defined in the parent schema." > ==> Here "any data above", means "above" in the hieararchy ? No, this was just wrong; it should be "except". > Not > clear, this is similar > to having a USB slot, but no device mounted on it as yet in UNIX > terms. Right ? > The query output on parent-schema should give empty data. > > 5. Section 3.2 > "If multiple mount points with the same name are defined in the same > module - either directly or because the mount point is defined in a > grouping and the grouping is used multiple times - then the > corresponding "mount-point" entry applies equally to all such mount > points." > ==> As per tree diagram, "mount-point" has two keys. So each module > can have multiple > mount points. So how to apply it "equally" ? Not clear. Note that the sentence starts with "If multiple mount points with the same name are defined in the same module" -- so this clearly doesn't apply to mount points with different names, right? For example, you can have: container foo { yangmnt:mount-point my-mnt-point; } container bar { yangmnt:mount-point my-mnt-point; } There is just one entry in the "mount-point" list, so that entry applies to both these mount points. Both are either "inline" or "shared-schema". > 6. Section 3.2 > Instead of "inline" and "shared-schema", I suggest to use > "variable-schema" and > "same-schema" > Reason: The key difference between the two is that in one case, the > schema MAY be different > while in the other the schema is same. The name can be similar to the > reason. At this point, we have to live with these terms. This was part of the compromise leading to this solution; there are other documents in the RFC editor's queue that depend on these terms. > Logical Point: > 1. Consider the topology where 1 main device is present with N logical > devices behind it. > When the mounting is done, it is quite possible that some of N devices > are having different > versions of modules. > This can lead to each instance of mount point, having different > schema. > How can the client understand the schema of each mount-point instance > ? Preferably get-schema of these devices and then know the model ? This draft says that each instance will have its own YANG library instance. So there the client can detect which versions of the different modules each instance supports. Then <get-schema> can be invoked to get the modules, if it is supported. /martin
- [netmod] Comments on schema mount draft Rohit Ranade
- Re: [netmod] Comments on schema mount draft Rohit Ranade
- Re: [netmod] Comments on schema mount draft Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [netmod] Comments on schema mount draft Ladislav Lhotka
- Re: [netmod] Comments on schema mount draft Rohit Ranade
- Re: [netmod] Comments on schema mount draft Rohit Ranade
- Re: [netmod] Comments on schema mount draft Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [netmod] Comments on schema mount draft Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [netmod] Comments on schema mount draft Rohit Ranade
- Re: [netmod] Comments on schema mount draft Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [netmod] Comments on schema mount draft Rohit Ranade
- Re: [netmod] Comments on schema mount draft Martin Bjorklund