Joel: The I2RS models for BGP utilize the BGP yang module definitions, but these models are not the same. I would agree with you that the I2RS models are unique.
Sue -----Original Message----- From: i2rs [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Joel M. Halpern Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2015 4:29 PM To: Andy Bierman; Susan Hares; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Re: [i2rs] inteirm 10/7/20 While there will be new information that needs new models, some of the things to be manipulated in an ephemeral fashion by I2RS are already in existing models. I have heard proposals to use some version of overlapping or related models, and I do not know what can be made to work. Yours, Joel On 10/11/15 4:24 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > Joel, > > do you expect that special models will be written for I2RS or do you > expect that generic routing configuration models will do the job? > > /js > > On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 04:11:11PM -0400, Joel M. Halpern wrote: >> I would phrase the marking need slightly differently. >> Given that it would seem onerous to expect all I2RS-supporting >> devices to support ephemeral behavior for all parts of all models, we >> need some way to clearly indicate what is expected. >> >> Trying to do it as separate models seems difficult. >> >> Marking elements in the model as ephemeral seems the clearest and >> most efficient mechanism, but I am sure there are other alternatives. >> >> Yours, >> Joel >> >> On 10/11/15 3:58 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: >>> On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 11:10:16AM -0700, Andy Bierman wrote: >>>> On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 10:51 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 09:55:31AM -0700, Andy Bierman wrote: >>>>>> On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 9:11 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder < >>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 04:13:03PM -0400, Susan Hares wrote: >>>>>>>> The 10/7/2015 interim discussed the ephemeral portion of the >>>>>>>> protocol >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 1) Ephemeral state is not unique to zI2RS >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 2) The ephemeral datastore is a datastore holds >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> configuration that is intended to not survive a reboot. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Configuration as YANG config true or a subset thereof? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> config=true nodes only. >>>>> >>>>> good >>>>> >>>>>> Some way is needed to specify I2RS conformance for a given YANG >>>>>> module, unless every persistent config leaf is expected to also >>>>>> be supported as ephemeral data. >>>>>> >>>>>> If not, a YANG "ephemeral-stmt" is probably needed, since >>>>>> config=true is insufficient to support I2RS conformance. >>>>> >>>>> One question is whether this needs to be inline in the data model >>>>> or not. If conformance is the goal, then you know what having >>>>> things defined inline has limits. If we would address conformance >>>>> in more general terms, perhaps I2RS conformance falls out as a special case. >>>>> >>>>>> One ephemeral datastore. >>>>>> No client panes. That was to support caching, but the >>>>>> architecture forbids caching, so that was taken out. >>>>>> >>>>>> One ephemeral pane that overrides the running datastore >>>>> >>>>> good >>>>> >>>>>>> Identities? I assume you mean schema nodes, do you? Adding by >>>>>>> defining an YANG extension such as i2rs:ephemeral true? How does >>>>>>> such an i2rs:ephemeral true interplay with config true/false? >>>>>>> What about contexts for must/when expressions? Or is the idea to >>>>>>> settle on RESTCONF and to work with YANG patch? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I think a real keyword is needed not an extension. >>>>>> Otherwise YANG groupings cannot be utilized w/ statements that >>>>>> are refined in the uses-stmt to set the ephemeral flag. >>>>> >>>>> I fail to understand the groupings argument. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> The refine-stmt is defined to work on YANG statements, not external >>>> statements. >>> >>> RFC 6020bis says in section 7.13.2.: >>> >>> o Any node can get refined extensions, if the extension allows >>> refinement. See Section 7.19 for details. >>> >>>> A YANG extension is (by definition) something external to the YANG >>>> language. >>>> The WG needs to decide if the ephemeral property should be specific >>>> to an I2RS YANG module or should be basic property of the YANG data >>>> modeling language. YANG keywords must be supported and they do not >>>> need to be imported from a YANG module to be used. >>> >>> Or it is a common extension (that is the extension is not I2RS >>> specific but instead for everything that wants to use ephemeral >>> datastores). >>> >>> Anyway, if the main purpose is to define a conformance level, it may >>> be worth thinking about adding a conformance mechanism that >>> decouples conformance requirements from the data model definition. >>> >>> /js >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> i2rs mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs > _______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs _______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
