Re: I-D Action: draft-rtgyangdt-rtgwg-device-model-02.txt

----- Original Message -----
From: "Lou Berger" <lberger@labn.net>
To: "t.petch" <ietfa@btconnect.com>; "Routing WG" <rtgwg@ietf.org>
Sent: Friday, February 26, 2016 12:22 PM

> Tom,
>
> I understand your comment wrt mount .  I think it is fair to suggest
that
> having a net mod working group document on the topic be a gating item.
Stay
> tuned. This sad, I hope that we can continue the discussion and
identify
> any other possible issues for this working group.
>
> I don't understand how the opstate discussion ties in.  Can you
elaborate?

Lou

section 1
"   The top open issues are:

  1.  The use of YSDL vs Structural Mount, i.e., a Netmod defined
       Schema Mount solution, needs to be resolved as does ensuring that
       the selected approach has the needed capabilities.

  2.  This document will need to match the evolution and
       standardization of [OC-OPSTATE] or [NETMOD-OPSTATE] by
       the Netmod WG.
.............
"
Sounds like a Normative Reference to me (and as I said before, I still
see divergent views expressed on the Netmod WG list).

Tom Petch

> Thanks,
> Lou
>
>
> On February 26, 2016 7:15:36 AM t.petch <ietfa@btconnect.com> wrote:
>
> > Lou
> >
> > I think that it is difficult, perhaps impossible, to review this I-D
> > until the foundations on which it is based, mount and op-state,
become
> > firmer.
> >
> > I track the discussions on the netmod WG list (and have done so
since
> > before it existed!) and do not expect either of those two issues to
> > settle down in the immediate future.  Some aspects of YANG get
agreed
> > quickly, others do not, and I see these two in the latter camp.
> >
> > So for me,  the way to progress this I-D would be to join the netmod
> > list and advance those two topics.
> >
> > Tom Petch
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Lou Berger" <lberger@labn.net>
> > To: "Routing WG" <rtgwg@ietf.org>
> > Sent: Monday, February 15, 2016 2:59 PM
> >
> >
> >> FYI - This has been out a little bit, but haven't seen any
comments.
> >> We'd definitely like to hear from the WG on this.
> >>
> >> quoting the draft:
> >>    This version is a major
> >>    change from the prior version and this change was enabled by the
> > work
> >>    on the previously mentioned Structural Mount/YSDL.
> >>
> >> Note that an interim on Structural Mount/YSDL (which I think of
> >> generally as 'schema mount') has been scheduled by the netmod WG --
> > see
> >> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netmod/current/msg15257.html
and
> >> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netmod/current/msg15260.html
> >>
> >> Lou
> >>
> >> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> >> Subject: I-D Action: draft-rtgyangdt-rtgwg-device-model-02.txt
> >> Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 05:16:07 -0800
> >> From: internet-drafts@ietf.org
> >> Reply-To: internet-drafts@ietf.org
> >> To: i-d-announce@ietf.org
> >>
> >>
> >> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
> >> directories.
> >>
> >>
> >>         Title           : Network Device YANG Organizational Models
> >>         Authors         : Acee Lindem
> >>                           Lou Berger
> >>                           Dean Bogdanovic
> >>                           Christan Hopps
> >> Filename        : draft-rtgyangdt-rtgwg-device-model-02.txt
> >> Pages           : 36
> >> Date            : 2016-01-22
> >>
> >> Abstract:
> >>    This document presents an approach for organizing YANG models in
a
> >>    comprehensive structure that may be used to configure and
operate
> >>    network devices.  The structure is itself represented as a YANG
> >>    model, with all of the related component models logically
organized
> >>    in a way that is operationally intuitive, but this model is not
> >>    expected to be implemented.  The identified component modules
are
> >>    expected to be defined and implemented on common network
devices.
> >>
> >>    This document also defines two modules that can be used to model
> > the
> >>    logical and virtual resource representations that may be present
on
> > a
> >>    network device.  Examples of common industry terms for logical
> >>    resource representations are Logical Systems or Routers.
Examples
> > of
> >>    of common industry terms for virtual resource representations
are
> >>    Virtual Routing and Forwarding (VRF) instances and Virtual
Switch
> >>    Instances (VSIs).
> >>
> >>    This document is derived from work submitted to the IETF by
members
> >>    of the informal OpenConfig working group of network operators
and
> > is
> >>    a product of the Routing Area YANG Architecture design team.
> >>
> >>
> >> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> >>
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-rtgyangdt-rtgwg-device-model/
> >>
> >> There's also a htmlized version available at:
> >> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-rtgyangdt-rtgwg-device-model-02
> >>
> >> A diff from the previous version is available at:
> >>
> >
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-rtgyangdt-rtgwg-device-model-02
> >>
> >>
> >> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of
> > submission
> >> until the htmlized version and diff are available at
tools.ietf.org.
> >>
> >> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> >> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> I-D-Announce mailing list
> >> I-D-Announce@ietf.org
> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce
> >> Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
> >> or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> rtgwg mailing list
> >> rtgwg@ietf.org
> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
> >
> >
>
>