[As an individual contributor]
In preparing to tomorrow's virtual interim meeting, I reread the
model-structure draft with an eye towards understanding the problem
statements. So far as I can tell, there are four problem statements:
1: disparate models exist without guidance how they stitch
together
2: some uber modules, importing many other modules, exist
but are incomplete
3: a multi-rooted tree that does not follow any logical
construction is difficult to work with operationally
4: no model catalog/registry is available to discover models
My issue with these problem statements is that they are provided without
clear examples illustrating the actual problems. Some references to
drafts are provided, but it's left to the reader to determine what the
problems are. For instance,
- for (1), RFCs 7223 and 7317 are provided as an example, but
without explanation. Is the issue that interfaces defined
in 7223 would be used by the NTP server defined in 7317?
- for (2), drafts-ietf-netmod-routing-cfg is provided as an
example. Looking at it, I see that YANG module
ietf-ipv6-unicast-routing imports a number of other modules,
but it's not clear why there is an expectation that it
should be any more than it is.
- for (3), RFCs 7223 and 7277 are provided as an example,
which I found confusing as 7277 actually augments 7223.
But it may be that this example was meant to highlight
a rare case where a good thing occurred (the text isn't
clear and, if so, a read it wrong the first time)
Interestingly, Section 4.2 (service-layer composition) describes what I
view to be the expected solution to many of these issues, and yet it's not
described as such. This implies that there may be yet another problem
statement missing in my list above.
Thanks,
Kent
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
