Rob Shakir <[email protected]> wrote: > Martin, > > We are almost certainly not on the same page as to what we're > debating. > > Martin Bjorklund <mailto:[email protected]> > > August 28, 2015 at 08:55 > > <https://www.postbox-inc.com/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=sumlink&utm_campaign=reach> > > > > Ok. So your proposal doesn't help with the problem of locating > > relevant YANG modules, but once their located, it is easier to find > > the ones related to a specific function, b/c they would augment a > > common path. Is this what you mean? > Having a structure to the way that the tree is defined helps a > developer trying to consume functions find the relevant > functionality. The model-writer needs to be aware of this structure. I > think there is an important difference between model writer (not very > many of these), and model consumer (lots of these).
I don't understand this answer (or maybe you misunderstood my question?). > > But this is the what we have been arguing about! Remove /device and > > we can put this behind us and move forward. > > > So, if I take openconfig-model-structure and make it look like: > > module: model-structure [NB: trimmed for legibility.] > +--rw info > +--rw hardware > +--rw system > +--rw interfaces > +--rw acl > +--rw qos > +--rw logical-routers > +--rw logical-router* [router-id] > +--rw router-id uint8 > +--rw router-name? string > +--rw layer-2-protocols > +--rw layer-3-protocols > +--rw vrf* [vrf-name] > +--rw routing-policy > > Then you have no objection to this approach? Even though it will > *still* very likely obsolete RFC'd models, which don't fit into the > structure. I didn't say that I agree with all nodes in the structure, but I do agree that a structure for common things (like intrefaces, routing protocols, oam functions etc) is useful. RFC 7223 already defines /interfaces and RFC 7317 defines /system, so I assume they can be kept. Unless of course you think the namespace is important. As for logical-routers, see the other thread. /martin _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
