Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 09:15:47AM +0200, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 09:02:32AM +0200, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > > Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I think some thought should also be given to simplify the references. > > > > Right now, in order to refer to a termination point, I have to use a > > > > triple (network-ref, node-ref, tp-ref). Have you considered using an > > > > instance-identifier with require-instance instead? One option would be > > > > to define proper typedefs such as > > > > > > > > typedef tp-ref { > > > > type instance-identifier { require-instance } > > > > description > > > > "An instance identifier refering to a termination point." > > > > } > > > > > > > > and then things can be collapsed. One would likely do the same for > > > > other model elements, that is introduce typdefs for node-ref, link-ref > > > > network-ref. This will make the tree much more compact. > > > > > > There are two drawbacks with this scheme. First, the model is less > > > precise. An instance-identifier can refer to anything, and there is > > > not formal constraint in the model to restrict it to a termination > > > point. > > > > Hence you wrap it in a typedef with an appropriate description clause. > > And by using the typedef, the model actually becomes more readable. > > > > > Second, even if the data model becomes more compact, the > > > instance data with an instance-identifier is more verbose and maybe > > > harder to read for an operator (less "direct"). > > > > I love to hear from operators that they find > > > > /nt:network[foo]/nt:node[bar]/nt:termination-point[baz] > > > > more complicated than this: > > > > > > <nt:network-ref>foo</nt:network-ref><nt:node-ref>bar</nt:node-ref><nt:termination-point>baz</nt:termination-point> > > > > Oops, I got it wrong: > > > /nt:network[network-id="foo"]/nt:node[node-id="bar"]/nt:termination-point[tp-id="baz"] > > > <nt:network-ref>foo</nt:network-ref><nt:node-ref>bar</nt:node-ref><nt:tp-ref>baz</nt:tp-ref> > > Anyway, if I count characters, the instance-identifier is still shorter. > > /js > > PS: If the argument is that operators can't understand instance identifier, > then NACM is horribly operationally broken. ;-)
No the argument is not that operators can't understand instance identifiers. The argument is that leafrefs are more precise and might be easier to read and write than i-is. /martin _______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
