Re: [netmod] revised-datastores and commonality of schemas

Randy Presuhn <randy_presuhn@alumni.stanford.edu> Thu, 02 November 2017 22:12 UTC

Return-Path: <randy_presuhn@alumni.stanford.edu>
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 326FC13FA05 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Nov 2017 15:12:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.201
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-2.8, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, SPF_PASS=-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 WBZi3hd92-RR for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Nov 2017 15:12:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pf0-f172.google.com (mail-pf0-f172.google.com [209.85.192.172]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3069B13F9E0 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Thu, 2 Nov 2017 15:12:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pf0-f172.google.com with SMTP id b79so713689pfk.5 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Thu, 02 Nov 2017 15:12:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=tYFIznU7H1DiICRLdGLFbEORTlKSII8pKh17duYcj48=; b=HWxDWU/7KXYgiH2BygTI0ZzKX3Tk60obK9KRRw8TN3AAvRALvteVuGUBnGlgXlTDUi XX8BmhObHI6KajzO6QN5zZKPcDC9LR2DedzJ+583UcpfYhlaCrLgPx2+OkYVKMBez2+y MiPuO15dGwd1MUDYcf+l2POLZm3PXCo+/ZU6RiqVPhTPmCHAKuxI4s7kfsaeCrjOSN3U +8OPN4sm+7TMmv6xnU6oIO4EfC80SgvlLMq8MFTrE9OznPmfkNXnKjMr3twiCoikASFm JvMwoeMEDJPv7GAMLanC2B1MdymgdMSAAscruQGx2NpkWAcsflcua7nKioCtM8ufsyeL +r8Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMCzsaXYjXQmmrecuGtHbr43RGf55njj1S06MCfoHKTTtMRJnmQ0XG92 YBUlHFId2IKuLe2UFuZTIZFri4BPOqy7qA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABhQp+S0fYSQ0QReocCVo2n+M/x/+8w47h9TSAS9c/im83s5XZQGt52ZBMEpQxQgDF5xlCKSChlmnA==
X-Received: by 10.84.233.69 with SMTP id k5mr4819778plt.189.1509660733333; Thu, 02 Nov 2017 15:12:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.102] (c-24-130-218-233.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [24.130.218.233]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b6sm6435169pgc.2.2017.11.02.15.12.12 for <netmod@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 02 Nov 2017 15:12:12 -0700 (PDT)
To: netmod@ietf.org
References: <076270A6-B2C1-44BC-8F02-F4E96675E76F@juniper.net> <AM3PR07MB1124D8DFADD0235A042364719B5C0@AM3PR07MB1124.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <CABCOCHSDs6eJBTO8V_-=WYMMb+dDvPbDFxoQUwCO-RYOVS9aXA@mail.gmail.com> <AM3PR07MB11246458D70D5355704191099B5C0@AM3PR07MB1124.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
From: Randy Presuhn <randy_presuhn@alumni.stanford.edu>
Message-ID: <7c48a435-1a1b-4bae-786b-068ac39ffab1@alumni.stanford.edu>
Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2017 15:12:17 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <AM3PR07MB11246458D70D5355704191099B5C0@AM3PR07MB1124.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/ob1UItWoJU5j4jFWEUKQnjeUlfo>
Subject: Re: [netmod] revised-datastores and commonality of schemas
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, 02 Nov 2017 22:12:15 -0000

Hi -

On 11/2/2017 2:12 PM, Sterne, Jason (Nokia - CA/Ottawa) wrote:
> I can’t think of a specific problem immediately.  But I think it means 
> templates would be considered as “applied” always right ?  Or do you see 
> cases where templates don’t show up when <operational> is read ?

Pure speculation...
consider the case of templates belonging to a provisioned
(but not yet inserted, much less activated) line card...

> Special rules are likely to be needed for validation though.  A DS (with 
> templates) won’t be valid unless you validate an exploded view.

That really depends on how one models templates.  A template
doesn't *have* to be the same "kind of thing" (e.g. class) as
the thing being instantiated/initialized from it, and consequently
is not necessarily going to have the same validation properties.
Consider the way "create with reference object" worked in another
universe.

Randy