Re: [netmod] questions about draft-rtgyangdt-rtgwg-device-model-00

Lou Berger <> Wed, 26 August 2015 19:33 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC22F1A8F4B for <>; Wed, 26 Aug 2015 12:33:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.667
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.667 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6y-9Gjz5B3Io for <>; Wed, 26 Aug 2015 12:33:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with SMTP id AE92F1A8AF9 for <>; Wed, 26 Aug 2015 12:33:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 2605 invoked by uid 0); 26 Aug 2015 19:33:24 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO CMOut01) ( by with SMTP; 26 Aug 2015 19:33:24 -0000
Received: from ([]) by CMOut01 with id 9XZB1r00F2SSUrH01XZEz2; Wed, 26 Aug 2015 13:33:23 -0600
X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.1 cv=EbVbHpWC c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=h1BC+oY+fLhyFmnTBx92Jg==:117 a=wU2YTnxGAAAA:8 a=cNaOj0WVAAAA:8 a=6PzwTDcoQqoA:10 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=-NfooI8aBGcA:10 a=uEJ9t1CZtbIA:10 a=uRRa74qj2VoA:10 a=t4kZfSXurUzZjt8LGJ0A:9 a=Z9LhhS483jpqG5uP:21 a=deikZXeXPrg3bohH:21 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From:Cc:References:To:Subject; bh=3103hrJUdnj9XJiCZB4nNiYteJjriR/l6ac4l3gjujY=; b=EKdaLgujzOaeZq5UoHPO+4ZIgWmQsFSj9snP6BrjVmVOtRgbOFO9eiT+xdCSKHnkussHMW4f8XTcOrsDuU5HB88khbe+X5lDCcCDO0FAhtODR+DsNjP4MQgDPfuIQVqb;
Received: from ([]:54627 helo=[]) by with esmtpa (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from <>) id 1ZUgRb-0002tt-E9; Wed, 26 Aug 2015 13:33:11 -0600
Subject: Re: [netmod] questions about draft-rtgyangdt-rtgwg-device-model-00
To: Nadeau Thomas <>, "Acee Lindem (acee)" <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <>
From: Lou Berger <>
X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N1110
Message-ID: <>
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 15:33:05 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Identified-User: {} {sentby:smtp auth authed with}
Archived-At: <>
Cc: Martin Bjorklund <>, "" <>, "" <>, "" <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Area Working Group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 19:33:25 -0000


On 8/26/2015 9:34 AM, Nadeau Thomas wrote:
> ...
> 	This is exactly what I want to get on the table.  

So taking a step back, perhaps there is a YANG language question at the
heart of this discussion.  I think we're seeing cases where the same
data model is useful in multiple cases/places.  The example I like to
use (although I know others disagree with the example) is the case of
PE/CE config information, where some of the exact same information may
end up on the CE and PE devices as well as the L3 service model.  In
this case we'd like a core model to be "included" (or "linked") into two
larger models.  Importantly, I'm referring to doing this as part of
model definition - not at server/device run time.  This is important for
the pre-provisioning case. 

It is my understanding that there is no way to really do this in a
general and extensible way (including allowing for augmentations)
today.  If there was such support, I do think we'd be saying that we'd
like the existing models to support this mechanism rather than our
current proposal of being relocated . 

(BTW this is my opinion, not speaking for the DT.)