Re: [Rtg-yang-coord] naive question ??

"Thomas D. Nadeau" <tnadeau@lucidvision.com> Thu, 05 February 2015 12:27 UTC

Return-Path: <tnadeau@lucidvision.com>
X-Original-To: rtg-yang-coord@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtg-yang-coord@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A36B1A87AF for <rtg-yang-coord@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Feb 2015 04:27:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.895
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.895 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RDNS_NONE=0.793, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 jL-4yWO8GVH8 for <rtg-yang-coord@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Feb 2015 04:27:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lucidvision.com (unknown [50.255.148.178]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE7711A7023 for <Rtg-yang-coord@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Feb 2015 04:27:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.134] (unknown [50.255.148.177]) by lucidvision.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31F912DD5371; Thu, 5 Feb 2015 07:27:06 -0500 (EST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2070.6\))
From: "Thomas D. Nadeau" <tnadeau@lucidvision.com>
In-Reply-To: <54D34B47.1050507@pi.nu>
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2015 07:27:05 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <D907FC42-80C2-48EB-B756-8F19195ECF39@lucidvision.com>
References: <54D34B47.1050507@pi.nu>
To: Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2070.6)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-yang-coord/8z8NbC-XvfkBcnwqYlpiYn2AsJk>
Cc: Rtg-yang-coord@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Rtg-yang-coord] naive question ??
X-BeenThere: rtg-yang-coord@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "\"List to discuss coordination between the Routing related YANG models\"" <rtg-yang-coord.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtg-yang-coord>, <mailto:rtg-yang-coord-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtg-yang-coord/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtg-yang-coord@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtg-yang-coord-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtg-yang-coord>, <mailto:rtg-yang-coord-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2015 12:27:08 -0000

> On Feb 5, 2015:5:51 AM, at 5:51 AM, Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu> wrote:
> 
> Folks,
> 
> I have what might be a naive question.
> 
> People have told me that in Yang we want to separate functionality from
> technology, i.e. we will look at OAM, management, routing, signaling
> and traffic engineering as aggregate functions and build our tree based
> on that.
> 
> Now if we are to model thing that are closely related e.g. MPLS OAM,
> signaling, routing and traffic engineering, does that mean that we have
> to work at separate pieces of the yang tree and repeat this for every
> piece of the technology?

	I think you can do a model dedicated to MPLS OAM.  The analogy is 
pretty much similar to how MIBs are created. You can import bits or
objects from all over the place to create things, or you can recreate them
in place.   There is a trade-off about modularity versus time-to-completion
here and I very much am not in favor of being zealous one way or the other.

	We also need to very much take an iterative process around these models:
they are not set in stone, and we should iterate on them to modify, adapt
and update them as necessary.  With that in mind, we've been encouraging people to
just starting writing them as best as possible and implementing either prototype
code or actually putting them into products so that we can see how they actually
operate in the wild.

	--Tom


> First, is this correctly understood or do I have to go back and discuss
> this again with the people proposing it?
> 
> If it is correct why is it superior to what we did for SNMP, one MIB-module for each protocol?
> 
> Are the decisions taken or is the jury still out?
> 
> /Loa
> -- 
> 
> 
> Loa Andersson                        email: loa@mail01.huawei.com
> Senior MPLS Expert                          loa@pi.nu
> Huawei Technologies (consultant)     phone: +46 739 81 21 64
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Rtg-yang-coord mailing list
> Rtg-yang-coord@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtg-yang-coord
>