Andy Bierman <a...@yumaworks.com> writes:
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 4:25 AM, Martin Bjorklund <m...@tail-f.com> wrote:
>
>> Robert Wilton <rwil...@cisco.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On 18/08/2015 18:22, Andy Bierman wrote:
>> > > This is how languages like SMIv2 and YANG work.
>> > > A conceptual object is given a permanent "home" within the tree of
>> > > object identifiers.
>> > > Moving data is very expensive, since any clients working with the old
>> > > data
>> > > will break as soon as the data is moved.
>> > >
>> > > I am not convinced the IETF can or should come up with a set of
>> > > containers
>> > > that covers every possible topic that can be modeled in YANG.
>> >
>> > I mostly agree, but having some more structure/advice as to where to
>> > place YANG modules may be helpful. I'm thinking more along the lines
>> > of broad categories rather than precise locations.
>>
>> +1
>>
>> > > If someone wants to builds a YANG controller node that is managing
>> > > the configuration for a network of devices then wouldn't they want
>> > > a particular device's interface configuration to be located
>> > > somewhere like /network/device/<device-name>/interfaces/interface?
>> > > Ideally, they would be able to use the same YANG definitions that
>> > > are defined for /interfaces/ but root them relative to
>> > > /network/device/<device-name>/.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Yes -- some of us (like Martin) have pointed this out many times.
>> > > The "device" container on an NE does not help at all wrt/
>> > > aggregation on a controller. "/device" or "/" work the same for this
>> > > purpose.
>>
>> Actually, I would argue that / works better. On the controller, you
>> probably have a list of devices you control (this is how our NCS
>> works, and how ODL works (I have been told)):
>>
>> container devices {
>> list device {
>> key name;
>> // meta-info about the device goes here, things like
>> // ip-address, port, auth info...
>> container data {
>> // all models supported by the devices are "mounted" here
>> }
>> }
>> }
>>
>> So on the controller, the path to interface "eth0" on device "foo"
>> would be:
>>
>> /devices/device[name='foo']/data/interfaces/interface[name='eth0']
>>
>> if we also have a top-level "/device" container we'd have:
>>
>> /devices/device[name='foo']/data/device/interfaces/interface[name='eth0']
>>
>> > What would the real resource location for
>> > "/network/device/<device-name>/interfaces/interface" be?
>>
>> I don't think there is such a thing as a "real" location. The path is
>> scoped in the system you work with; in the controller it might be as I
>> illustrated above, in the device it starts with /interfaces, but in a
>> controller-of-controllers it might be:
>>
>> /domains/domain[name='bar']/devices/device[name='foo']/data
>> /interfaces/interface[name='eth0']
>>
>> Currently we have a proprietary way of "relocating" YANG modules, and
>> ODL has its "mount", and I think Andy has some other mechanism. Maybe
>> the time has come to standardize how mount works, and maybe then also
>> standardize the list of devices in a controller model.
>>
>>
>
> +1
>
> We just need to standardize a "docroot within a docroot". This is not
> relocation of subtrees within the datastore, this is just mounting a
> datastore somewhere within a parent datastore.
The current definition of datastore is too general, so I don't know what
datastore inside datastore means. What's clear is that a single module
cannot just be mounted anywhere. For example, if ietf-interfaces is
mounted under /device and ietf-ip straight under /, then I don't see how
references and XPath expressions could be reliably modified to work as
expected.
That's why I think only self-contained packages can be mounted, and
inside them all references can be prepended with the mount root.
Lada
>
> In YANG validation terms, you simply adjust the docroot to the nested mount
> point,
> and the replicated datastore can be used as if it were stand-alone.
> This would allow any sort of encapsulation of datastores and not add any
> data model complexity to devices which do not have virtual servers
> (most of them).
>
>
>>
>> /martin
>>
>
>
> Andy
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> netmod@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
