Re: [netmod] Yangdoctors last call review of draft-ietf-netmod-entity-07

Radek Krejčí <rkrejci@cesnet.cz> Tue, 09 January 2018 15:02 UTC

Return-Path: <rkrejci@cesnet.cz>
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 B300012D86C; Tue, 9 Jan 2018 07:02:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.309
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.309 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_MED=-2.3, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cesnet.cz
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 PPDYUnsAjhig; Tue, 9 Jan 2018 07:01:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from office2.cesnet.cz (office2.cesnet.cz [IPv6:2001:718:1:101::144:244]) (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 F2EC3126C0F; Tue, 9 Jan 2018 07:01:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pckrejci.nat9.vcit.vutbr.net (unknown [IPv6:2001:67c:1220:80c:d0:552c:73a5:18da]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by office2.cesnet.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5C3CE400065; Tue, 9 Jan 2018 16:01:54 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cesnet.cz; s=office2; t=1515510114; bh=naClBdZvux3jD73SoAsAQEt7sy8R1v8aE0K+cZSeAJE=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=K+EcsZglGf3Tb/9GaZdOb4r8ptpDWnoah5e7JUBxQaF5wrRAJvm1K/apZibEHEvv7 3kOp49l2Zc975d2//0viBpA20d9EGRiX+14wHoNGT4Wtrj6wH01493oGXVg/eDuAym EG7eB6FEvDeemCgKS8zUSy146CRZN3M7Wn7dvSSg=
To: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
Cc: yang-doctors@ietf.org, draft-ietf-netmod-entity.all@ietf.org, netmod@ietf.org
References: <151507502144.23798.1644071576333370968@ietfa.amsl.com> <20180108.162153.18427707995478583.mbj@tail-f.com>
From: =?UTF-8?B?UmFkZWsgS3JlasSNw60=?= <rkrejci@cesnet.cz>
Message-ID: <08db428e-f9af-022d-0dc9-c14dbddcd745@cesnet.cz>
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2018 16:01:54 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.5.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20180108.162153.18427707995478583.mbj@tail-f.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/pXPckC1ad4vV8ADetQDdpITmRMU>
Subject: Re: [netmod] Yangdoctors last call review of draft-ietf-netmod-entity-07
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: Tue, 09 Jan 2018 15:02:00 -0000

Hi Martin,
you are right, now I see it. So, to me, the document is Ready.

Andy, text in RFC6087bis (Temporary non-NMDA Modules) should be changed since it seems to limit the temporary module to contain data nodes only.

OLD
    It contains the top-level config=false data nodes that would have been defined in a legacy YANG module (before NMDA).

NEW
    It contains the top-level config=false data nodes that would have been defined in a legacy YANG module (before NMDA) as well as the notifications, RPCs and actions that would refer such nodes.


Regards,
Radek



Dne 8.1.2018 v 16:21 Martin Bjorklund napsal(a):
> Hi,
>
> Radek Krejčí <rkrejci@cesnet.cz> wrote:
>> Reviewer: Radek Krejčí
>> Review result: Ready with Issues
>>
>> The document itself and normative parts seem fine to me, the only issue I see
>> is with the ietf-hardware-state module in non-normative appendix A. It seems to
>> me that this temporary non-NMDA module does not conform to its purpose as
>> described in RFC6087bis. According to guidelines, such a module is intended to
>> provide state (config false) data in case the server does not implement NMDA
>> (to bridge the time period until NMDA is implemented). So such a server is IMHO
>> intended to implement both modules, foo and foo-state. The foo-state contains
>> "the top-level config-false data nodes that would have been defined in a legacy
>> YANG module" - so it's only the ro mirror of data nodes. But
>> ietf-hardware-state contains notifications, which are not the data nodes as
>> defined in RFC7950. I understand why the notifications were placed also into
>> the ietf-hardware-state - the module's description states that "If a server
>> that implements this module but doesn't support NMDA also supports
>> configuration of hardware components, it SHOULD also implement the module
>> 'ietf-hardware' ...", so it allows its standalone usage in case the server does
>> not support hw configuration. But in such a case, the server can implement
>> ietf-hardware with deviations on the config=true nodes.
> The problem with useing the notifcations defined in ietf-hardware in
> this case is that all leafrefs would be wrong; they'd point into a
> schema that is not implemented.
>
>> The same way it had to
>> implement the legacy YANG module (before NMDA).
> Before NMDA the leafrefs in the notifcations pointed to
> /hardware-state, and all config was defined with an if-feature, so a
> server did not have to use any deviations in this case.
>
>
>
> /martin
>
>
>
>> So I think that the notifications should be removed from ietf-hardware-state
>> and the module's description should change this way:
>>
>> OLD
>>
>>   If a server that implements this module but doesn't support NMDA
>>   also supports configuration of hardware components, it SHOULD
>>   also implement the module 'ietf-hardware' in the configuration
>>   datastores. The corresponding state data is found in the
>>   '/hw-state:hardware' subtree.
>>
>> NEW
>>
>>   If a server that implements this module but doesn't support NMDA,
>>   it MUST also implement the module 'ietf-hardware' in the
>>   configuration datastores. The corresponding state data is found
>>   in the '/hw-state:hardware' subtree.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> netmod mailing list
>> netmod@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod