Re: [netmod] evaluation of "when" under NMDA

Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz> Mon, 04 December 2017 18:20 UTC

Return-Path: <lhotka@nic.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 20A0412869B for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Dec 2017 10:20:19 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7 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_HI=-5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nic.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 E7mEqQ7ccCQ8 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Dec 2017 10:20:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.nic.cz (mail.nic.cz [217.31.204.67]) (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 41DD1128656 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Dec 2017 10:20:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from birdie16 (unknown [IPv6:2a01:5e0:29:ffff:ffc6:c393:cdb9:8db1]) by mail.nic.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7603563597; Mon, 4 Dec 2017 19:20:15 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=nic.cz; s=default; t=1512411615; bh=9pmQgrzD+c+ZGNlEfRkzX3jOq4bgGrfKOiEa0Bparb0=; h=From:To:Date; b=KFETxIJecXfBy0kDVl0UdXIezkYiRiap0tffFmhYXWhb5NhlyomytPnFRdIgYtzUW r97Kd9jN2XDDE/Vu7rgZI2TFxoqNZngQvsPgqlGTsQAED3IiFZ4QXOp4IgSgsxFI/J nM+isipuT06A/fZ7jZmVQT6YETBrAQj879OzvMg4=
Message-ID: <1512411615.8751.11.camel@nic.cz>
From: Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz>
To: Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>, Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>, NETMOD WG <netmod@ietf.org>
Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2017 19:20:15 +0100
In-Reply-To: <CABCOCHQrV-iE5TO2HGXRt3LD0+UtAkAfcJhi34iDLy8Juy-ZNw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1512404811.1422.63.camel@nic.cz> <20171204.173431.1294203680272812703.mbj@tail-f.com> <1512407158.6635.8.camel@nic.cz> <20171204172247.rj3ilazharvzbyn6@elstar.local> <CABCOCHQrV-iE5TO2HGXRt3LD0+UtAkAfcJhi34iDLy8Juy-ZNw@mail.gmail.com>
Organization: CZ.NIC
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.26.2
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.99.2 at mail
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/vljfeERjz_6ajgX4TscU-dG2kbA>
Subject: Re: [netmod] evaluation of "when" under NMDA
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, 04 Dec 2017 18:20:19 -0000

On Mon, 2017-12-04 at 09:36 -0800, Andy Bierman wrote:
> 
> 
> On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 9:22 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-
> university.de> wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 06:05:58PM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2017-12-04 at 17:34 +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> > > > Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz> wrote:
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > if we have
> > > > >
> > > > > augment "/target/node" {
> > > > >   when "...";
> > > > >   ...
> > > > > }
> > > > >
> > > > > is the "when" expression supposed to be evaluated separately in each
> > > >
> > > > datastore,
> > > > > and the augment applied only in those datastores where the result is
> > true?
> > > >
> > > > Yes.
> > >
> > > But then it cannot be guaranteed that the schema for <operational> is a
> > superset
> > > of the schema of configuration datastores - the when expression can
> > evaluate to
> > > false in <operational> but true in <intended>.
> > >
> > 
> > For me, its still the same schema - a when expression does not change
> > my notion of 'schema'.
> 
> 
> Agreed, but it changes the validation results against the schema.
> As Martin pointed out, we already have this separate validation issue in
> <candidate>.
> This is not a problem though because only <running> is required to pass
> validation tests.

This is not true because "when" constraints are among those that have to be
satisfied in *all* data trees (sec. 8.1 in RFC 7950).

I have argued many many times that it is conceptually wrong to make the schema
dependent on an instance data tree that the schema defines. If "when" was just a
special "must", everything would be fine.

Lada

> 
> I think NMDA works out fine because the YANG validation of config=true nodes
> is done in <intended>, not in <operational>.  Only the config=false nodes
> would be validated in <operational>, done by the client, not the server.
> (Server implementations do not validate their own output).
> 
> 
> > /js
> > 
> 
> 
> Andy
>  
> > --
> > Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
> > Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
> > Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > netmod mailing list
> > netmod@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
> 
> 
-- 
Ladislav Lhotka
Head, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67