On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 1:44 AM, Martin Bjorklund <m...@tail-f.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Here's a short summary, and then some questions for the WG.
>
> The ietf-yang-library module is designed to serve two purposes:
>
> 1. A protocol-independent advertisement mechanism for YANG 1.1
> modules.
>
> 2. A list of the YANG modules stored in a server.
>
>
> Q1. Do you agree with these goals?
>
>
> Q2. Should this module be designed to work with both YANG 1.0 and
> YANG 1.1 servers - i.e., should it have yang-version 1.1 or not?
>
> If it should not be defined using YANG 1.1, why is this module
> special?
>
>
What does 'special' mean here?
Can you identify a YANG 1.1 statement that this module needs?
>
> Q3. Should the /modules/module list be designed to store both YANG
> 1.0 and YANG 1.1 modules?
>
>
Do you have some reason why YANG 1.0 files should be excluded?
>
> Q4. Consider these modules, which both import foo without revision:
>
> module a { ... import foo; ... }
> module b { ... import foo; ... }
>
> Do we require a server that implements both a and b to use the
> same revision of foo?
>
> If the answer is yes, we need to indicate the default revision
> that the server uses in the model:
>
> container modules {
> ...
> list module {
> ...
> leaf default-revision {
> type boolean;
> default false;
> description
> "Indicates that this revision is used by the server if
> this module is imported without a specific revision
> date.";
> }
> }
> }
>
> If the answer is no, note that this puts an implementation burden
> on the client. A client cannot simply download all listed
> modules, and load/compile/process them as one set.
>
> If the anwser is no, I propose that we extend the module as such:
>
> container modules {
> ...
> list module {
> ...
> list imported-without-revision {
> key "name revision";
> ...
> }
> }
> }
>
>
I do not think this change is needed
> A server could then list:
>
> <module>
> <name>a</name>
> <revision>2015-01-01</revision>
> <imported-without-revision>
> <name>foo</name>
> <revision>2002-02-02</revision>
> </imported-without-revision>
> </module>
> <module>
> <name>b</name>
> <revision>2015-01-01</revision>
> <imported-without-revision>
> <name>foo</name>
> <revision>2001-01-01</revision>
> </imported-without-revision>
> </module>
>
>
>
YANG 1.0 and current 1.1 says that if no revision-date is used,
then the client does not know the version and the
server is not required to pick any specific version.
Your proposal seems to be that the library will fill in all the
revision-dates
and reproduce the import-tree. It makes more sense to make
import-by-revision mandatory. But IMO this is not a real
problem so there is no point in this solution.
>
> /martin
>
>
Andy
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> netmod@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
