Hi Alex, "Alexander Clemm (alex)" <[email protected]> writes:
> Hi Lada, > > FWIW, I have a few general question/comment on the draft, for which it might > be useful to add clarification: > > > - The general approach appears to be that metadata generally > needs to be defined as part of the module, and when it is, must be > supported. How about augmenting an existing model with metadata Unfortunately, no. Annotations are defined via YANG extensions that may be certainly ignored by the client, and perhaps even by the server - see my earlier mail https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/TyObJv62iwRvfXgb1Lm-YGIwfP4 It would help somewhat to have "annotation" as a built-in statement though not completely. > "after" the fact (i.e. after the original definition)? This appears > to be potentially a more common usage in practice. It would be useful > to comment on expected usage, and perhaps add an example in which an > existing model is augmented with metadata (or at least allude to the > fact that this is a possibility). Annotations are orthogonal to the "normal" YANG stuff. If they are defined, and their use negotiated between the server and client, then they can be used anywhere. In practice, an annotation may be designed, e.g., for certain type(s) of data nodes, but from the YANG point of view they aren't a new data node type, as attributes in XML. That's why annotations are always defined at the top level of a module. So, by design, annotations are not intended to augment a specific target node. > > - How does metadata show up in regular operations - how is it > modified and retrieved; how is it being populated? I think it would The server or client can simply add them to NETCONF or RESTCONF payload, using the encoding specified in the draft. > also be helpful to add a section that illustrates usage of metadata. I > was surprised to e.g. not see "default" as a substatement; is this > something that should be added? Given that annotations are not defined for specific locations in the schema, defaults are not needed. Lada > > --- Alex > > From: netmod [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Kent Watsen > Sent: Monday, June 29, 2015 6:14 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [netmod] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-netmod-yang-metadata-01 > (until 2015-06-29) > > > All, > > Today is the cutoff date for the Last Call for this draft, but the author > indicated that comments received today or tomorrow can be incorporated into > the draft-update being worked on. So, if you have any lingering reviews, > please send them before as soon as possible. > > Thanks! > Kent > > > > From: Kent Watsen <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> > Date: Monday, June 15, 2015 at 6:49 PM > To: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> > Subject: [netmod] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-netmod-yang-metadata-01 (until > 2015-06-29) > > > This is a notice to start a NETMOD WG last call for the document "Defining > and Using Metadata with YANG": > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netmod-yang-metadata-01 > > Please indicate your support by Monday June 29, 2015 at 9PM EST. > We are not only interested in receiving defect reports, we are equally > interested in statements of the form: > > "I have reviewed I-D XYZ and I found no issues" > "I have implemented the data model in I-D XYZ" > "I am implementing the data model in I-D XYZ" > "I am considering to implement the data model in I-D XYZ" > > This is the first Last Call for this document. > > Kent, as NETMOD co-chair > -- Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
