Re: [netmod] Comments on draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount-09
Robert Wilton <rwilton@cisco.com> Thu, 29 March 2018 09:31 UTC
Return-Path: <rwilton@cisco.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 5B4EB1200C1 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Mar 2018 02:31:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.8
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.8 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=neutral reason="invalid (public key: DNS error: SERVFAIL)" header.d=cisco.com
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 FObFGonQrIkD for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Mar 2018 02:31:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aer-iport-2.cisco.com (aer-iport-2.cisco.com [173.38.203.52]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D20671200A0 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Mar 2018 02:31:33 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=5251; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1522315894; x=1523525494; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:mime-version: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=1p9CPOyfB7GF9FtyPkwuSQX3xPAqe4t2e2K0qVHMxKk=; b=Sqazz8fO0B2Bf92+t/XM2SfHAwNh+5fj6Ljpd3y1cKAUDN3By+Ij7WOM LS3uAPjX5I3o9O+OGVawH6xhVKyOJHdtWtO6XOKG9cbkLQD6gB1Yv5vt5 gTA6vToNeqtI/y6LFfY+5mbVBZz2zW+EhEI/rueeekRgt42glfcLt4WhG k=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0CQAAD3sLxa/xbLJq1TBgQZAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBBwEBAQEBhCJvKINciABejXUhgQ+LD4dCgXoLGAuEFUwChDU0GAECAQEBAQEBAmsohSUBAQEDAQEBIQ8BBTYXBAsRBAEBAQICIwMCAicfCQgGAQwGAgEBhQIID6t6ghyEVYNrgimBCIgrP4EMIgyBWnyCZisBAQOBLhUMgwqCVAKHIpARCIVRiFMGgS85hVQihFOJEoFLgleCRIElHDiBUjMaCBsVOoJDCYISjjM+MI49AQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.48,376,1517875200"; d="scan'208";a="2891071"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-2.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 29 Mar 2018 09:31:31 +0000
Received: from [10.63.23.169] (dhcp-ensft1-uk-vla370-10-63-23-169.cisco.com [10.63.23.169]) by aer-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w2T9VUuf000842; Thu, 29 Mar 2018 09:31:31 GMT
To: "Yemin (Amy)" <amy.yemin@huawei.com>, "otilibil@eurecom.fr" <otilibil@eurecom.fr>, "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
References: <20180326131751.28bgdvrf8kokc4k4@webmail.eurecom.fr> <9C5FD3EFA72E1740A3D41BADDE0B461FCEFE66B2@dggema521-mbs.china.huawei.com> <c1f0a35e-2733-613d-97a4-7710799b2ed5@cisco.com> <9C5FD3EFA72E1740A3D41BADDE0B461FCEFE7250@dggema521-mbs.china.huawei.com>
From: Robert Wilton <rwilton@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <b4b30638-6986-3cec-cab8-e67c1826df1d@cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2018 10:31:30 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <9C5FD3EFA72E1740A3D41BADDE0B461FCEFE7250@dggema521-mbs.china.huawei.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/qlnWWH1ivSfR3TRtUzO8zB2PuRY>
Subject: Re: [netmod] Comments on draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount-09
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, 29 Mar 2018 09:31:38 -0000
Hi Amy, On 29/03/2018 08:09, Yemin (Amy) wrote: > Hi Rob, > > Thanks for clarification. > By using the deviation, I can remove the containers I don't need, and I could also remove some data nodes within the container, right? Yes. > > BTW, your reply provides a good guideline. Is it possible to include those text into the draft? I'll leave this to the authors to decide. A more realistic example may be helpful given that mine was slightly contrived. Thanks, Rob > > BR, > Amy > -----Original Message----- > From: Robert Wilton [mailto:rwilton@cisco.com] > Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2018 6:33 PM > To: Yemin (Amy) <amy.yemin@huawei.com>; otilibil@eurecom.fr; netmod@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [netmod] Comments on draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount-09 > > Hi Amy, > > > On 27/03/2018 04:47, Yemin (Amy) wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I also have a question/comment regarding this draft, maybe if it's discussed already. >> >> If there a model A, which I would like to use just part of model A in another model B, what should I do? >> The draft states that "This document allows mounting of complete data models only. Other specifications may extend this model by defining additional mechanisms such as mounting sub-hierarchies of a module." >> It seems that the current schema mount doesn't support such usage. > That is correct. > >> >> >> Then I'm thinking that using deviation to create a new sub-module A', then mount the sub-module A' in model B. >> Will it be a possible way out? > If you have a module A, then you could create another module, A-deviations, that used deviation delete statements to remove parts of A's schema. > > Then a server could mount both modules A and A-deviations, hence excluding parts of module A at the mount point. > > However, this approach would not allow you to only mount a descendant subtree in A. E.g. You couldn't just directly mount the "interfaces/interface/statistics" container from RFC 8343, but you could mount the ietf-interfaces module and then deviate delete all nodes except for the interfaces/interface/statistics container. > > Thanks, > Rob > > >> BR, >> Amy >> -----Original Message----- >> From: netmod [mailto:netmod-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of >> otilibil@eurecom.fr >> Sent: Monday, March 26, 2018 7:18 PM >> To: netmod@ietf.org >> Subject: [netmod] Comments on draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount-09 >> >> Hi members, >> >> I comment on that draft: >> >> * Instead of "it is often necessary that an existing module (or a set >> of modules) is added to the data model starting at a non-root >> location", this would read better: "it is often necessary that an >> existing module (or a set of modules) be added to the data model at >> locations other than the root." (Section 1) >> >> * 'The "mount-point" statement MUST NOT be used in a YANG version 1 >> module' Why this documents keeps YANG 1 off from its scope? (Section >> 3.1) >> >> * 'Specifically, a server that doesn?t support the NMDA, MAY implement >> revision 2016-06-21 of "ietf-yang-library" [RFC7950] under a mount >> point' [RFC7895] defines "ietf-yang-library", not [RFC7950] (Section >> 6) >> >> * Why not "Tree Diagram" instead of "Data Model"? The wording has >> become a Best Practice (Section 8) >> >> * Idem, "This document...has the following diagram" captures better the Best Practice than "This document...has the following structure" >> (Section 8) >> >> * Same remark on restricting to YANG 1.1: "The ?mount-point? statement >> MUST NOT be used in a YANG version 1 module, neither explicitly nor >> via a ?uses? statement (description of the extension "mount-point") >> >> * Should this sentence refers only to [RFC6020]? "This document registers a YANG module in the YANG Module Names registry [RFC6020]" >> (Section 10) >> >> * The document cites /schema-mounts as "The schema defined by this >> state data provides detailed information about a server implementation >> may help an attacker identify the server capabilities and server >> implementations with known bugs" I think this section should warn also >> on: >> ** Section 2.1.2 and 4 of [RFC7895] (the list 'module' contains the leaf 'schema': from which anyone may retrieve a YANG module) >> ** Section 3 of [RFC6022] (it defines the RPC 'get-schema'; with which anyone may get a YANG module) >> ** and Section 5 of [RFC8341] (reminding administrators to set user rights accordingly, and giving their defaults values). >> >> Regards, >> Ariel >> >> [RFC6020] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6020 >> [RFC7895] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7895 >> [RFC7950] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7950 >> [RFC8341] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8341 >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> --------- This message was sent using EURECOM Webmail: >> http://webmail.eurecom.fr >> >> _______________________________________________ >> netmod mailing list >> netmod@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod >> >> _______________________________________________ >> netmod mailing list >> netmod@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod >> . >>
- [netmod] Comments on draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mou… otilibil
- Re: [netmod] Comments on draft-ietf-netmod-schema… Yemin (Amy)
- Re: [netmod] Comments on draft-ietf-netmod-schema… Robert Wilton
- Re: [netmod] Comments on draft-ietf-netmod-schema… Yemin (Amy)
- Re: [netmod] Comments on draft-ietf-netmod-schema… Robert Wilton
- Re: [netmod] Comments on draft-ietf-netmod-schema… Yemin (Amy)
- Re: [netmod] Comments on draft-ietf-netmod-schema… Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [netmod] Comments on draft-ietf-netmod-schema… otilibil