Re: [netmod] Schema Mount with Inline Type

Rohit R Ranade <rohitrranade@huawei.com> Mon, 07 January 2019 02:04 UTC

Return-Path: <rohitrranade@huawei.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 BDF61130E68 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 6 Jan 2019 18:04:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, 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 61CXfOnoO-TX for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 6 Jan 2019 18:04:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [185.176.76.210]) (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 A88ED12872C for <netmod@ietf.org>; Sun, 6 Jan 2019 18:04:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from LHREML710-CAH.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.107]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 64B8E58A473AA8AD0329; Mon, 7 Jan 2019 02:04:06 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from lhreml701-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.50) by LHREML710-CAH.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.33) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Mon, 7 Jan 2019 02:04:06 +0000
Received: from lhreml701-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.50) by lhreml701-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.50) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1591.10; Mon, 7 Jan 2019 02:04:05 +0000
Received: from DGGEML401-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.17.32) by lhreml701-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.50) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_0, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA_P256) id 15.1.1591.10 via Frontend Transport; Mon, 7 Jan 2019 02:04:04 +0000
Received: from DGGEML530-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.8.165]) by DGGEML401-HUB.china.huawei.com ([fe80::89ed:853e:30a9:2a79%31]) with mapi id 14.03.0415.000; Mon, 7 Jan 2019 10:03:57 +0800
From: Rohit R Ranade <rohitrranade@huawei.com>
To: Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz>, "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [netmod] Schema Mount with Inline Type
Thread-Index: AdSY8QlqYjMVcg7lQlazR9ZWHav3JQJbzSAAAC8C7KAAMzhHAACQ9MyQ
Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2019 02:03:56 +0000
Message-ID: <991B70D8B4112A4699D5C00DDBBF878A6BCC1258@dggeml530-mbs.china.huawei.com>
References: <991B70D8B4112A4699D5C00DDBBF878A6BCB50C7@dggeml530-mbs.china.huawei.com> <878t03duu9.fsf@nic.cz> <991B70D8B4112A4699D5C00DDBBF878A6BCBEF10@dggeml530-mbs.china.huawei.com> <8736q8io15.fsf@nic.cz>
In-Reply-To: <8736q8io15.fsf@nic.cz>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.18.150.121]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/pKsSoXAPFfHknjGJdXW58uBkOgA>
Subject: Re: [netmod] Schema Mount with Inline Type
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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, 07 Jan 2019 02:04:11 -0000


-----Original Message-----
From: Ladislav Lhotka [mailto:lhotka@nic.cz] 
Sent: 04 January 2019 18:22
To: Rohit R Ranade <rohitrranade@huawei.com>om>; netmod@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [netmod] Schema Mount with Inline Type

Rohit R Ranade <rohitrranade@huawei.com> writes:

> Hi,
>
> I donot have a specific scenario as of now. But the scenario used in the draft is that a module which is mounted needs to refer to its parent-schema. I donot see how that is related to "mount point instances having shared-schema or different schema". 
>
> If we look at the LNE draft, I think it avoids the "parent-reference"
> by having a " bind-lne-name" which binds the interface to the LNE and 
> also creates a "system" configuration for that interface inside the 
> LNE instance. So the interface references inside the mount jail get 
> resolved.

If I understand it correctly (maybe not), the "bind-lne-name" is used at the level of Network Device to assign an interface to a configured LNE. This information IMO is not meaningful inside the LNE itself. If it is so, there is in fact no parent reference.

>
> So in future, if "inlined" schema needs to use parent-schema, it needs 
> to use a "bind" mechanism to add entries from the module in 
> parent-schema to the same module under mount-point ?

In my view, the inline case makes only sense in the split management scenario where each mount jail is managed via a separate NC/RC server. In this case it makes no sense to refer to data outside the mount jail.

My standard complaint is that schema mount mixes up two rather different
concepts: the shared-schema case is a data modelling concept whereas the inline case is more about combining instance data. This causes a lot of complexity and confusion.
[Rohit R Ranade] +1  

Lada

>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ladislav Lhotka [mailto:lhotka@nic.cz]
> Sent: 02 January 2019 19:29
> To: Rohit R Ranade <rohitrranade@huawei.com>om>; netmod@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [netmod] Schema Mount with Inline Type
>
> Hi Rohit,
>
> Rohit R Ranade <rohitrranade@huawei.com> writes:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>>    module: ietf-yang-schema-mount
>>      +--ro schema-mounts
>>         +--ro namespace* [prefix]
>>         |  +--ro prefix    yang:yang-identifier
>>         |  +--ro uri?      inet:uri
>>         +--ro mount-point* [module label]
>>            +--ro module                 yang:yang-identifier
>>            +--ro label                  yang:yang-identifier
>>            +--ro config?                boolean
>>            +--ro (schema-ref)
>>               +--:(inline)
>>               |  +--ro inline!
>>               +--:(shared-schema)
>>                  +--ro shared-schema!
>>                     +--ro parent-reference*   yang:xpath1.0
>>
>> Any reason for not adding "parent-reference" for "inline" type ? What 
>> is the solution for the modules defined under such mount points to 
>> refer to parent schema ?
>
> The inline case was intentionally designed with an impenetrable "mount jail". Do you see any use case where parent references are needed and the "shared-schema" strategy cannot be used?
>
> Lada
>
>>
>> With Regards,
>> Rohit
>> _______________________________________________
>> netmod mailing list
>> netmod@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>
> --
> Ladislav Lhotka
> Head, CZ.NIC Labs
> PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67

--
Ladislav Lhotka
Head, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67