LoL! From: Edward Crabbe <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Thursday, January 24, 2013 2:09 PM To: Thomas Nadeau <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, Alia Atlas <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, Adrian Farrel <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: Re: [i2rs] format for information models
I could not agree with your agreeing with me more. ;) On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 10:33 AM, Thomas Nadeau <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: From: Edward Crabbe <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Thursday, January 24, 2013 1:28 PM To: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, Alia Atlas <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, Adrian Farrel <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: Re: [i2rs] format for information models +1 here. If the relationships are hierarchical / acyclic then YANG would be a good choice /but/ we also have draft-amante-irs-topology-use-cases-0 on the table, and potentially some related documents incoming; if these efforts move forward (ie: modelling inter layer relationships and the physical plant) we may want to look at other alternatives. I think this is an interesting discussion to have; it's a bit premature to settle on a solution given the current uncertainty in the use case set, *but* it's almost never too early to start experimenting. That is my (implied) point for supporting the Yang approach. Specifically, to me it is about picking an approach (that seems to have a lot of support) and just working with it until someone finds something better to use. At this point we need to stop talking about which hammer to pick, and instead pick one and build something. Call it experimental or exploratory, but I would like us to start building some examples. We can tear them down later, but its clear we won't get anywhere until we start somewhere. --Tom On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 8:26 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 11:13:44AM -0500, Alia Atlas wrote: > Juergen, > > What would you recommend for an information model for i2rs? > Frankly, I do not know. I am still unsure what the scope/complexity of i2rs really is. To find out, I guess people just have to pick something and get started. YANG tree diagrams are fine to get a quick overview of YANG data models, they likely won't be the right tool if many of data model items with more complex interrelationships are involved - then you need additional diagrams. /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587<tel:%2B49%20421%20200%203587> Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103<tel:%2B49%20421%20200%203103> <http://www.jacobs-university.de/> _______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs _______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
_______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
