Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 03:19:14PM +0200, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Martin Bjorklund <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > I think we agreed that is ok for a YANG 1.1 module to import a YANG
> > > 1.0 module.
> > > 
> > > But should it also be ok for a 1.0 module to import a 1.1 module?
> > > 
> > > If we make this illegal, we might run into problems.  For example,
> > > ietf-ip imports ietf-interfaces.  Suppose we update ietf-interfaces
> > > and the new version use YANG 1.1.  Is it ok for a server to implement
> > > the 1.0 version of ietf-ip and 1.1 version of ietf-interfaces?  If the
> > > answer is no, it means that we either have to update all modules to
> > > 1.1 more or less at the same time (including vendor models!), or we
> > > keep existing modules on 1.0 "forever".
> > 
> > I suggest we add this text:
> > 
> > -------------------
> > 
> > * Coexistence with YANG version 1
> > 
> > A YANG version 1.1 module MUST NOT include a YANG version 1 submodule,
> > and vice versa.
> 
> Vice versa? I assume you mean 'a YANG version 1 module MUST NOT
> include a YANG version 1.1 submodule. Perhaps it is clearer to spell
> this out explicitly?

Ok.

> 
> > A YANG version 1 module or submodule MUST NOT import a YANG version
> > 1.1 module by revision.
> > 
> > A YANG version 1.1 module or submodule MAY import a YANG version
> > 1 module by revision.
> > 
> > A YANG version 1.1 module or submodule MAY import a YANG version 1
> > module without revision, and vice versa.  This rule exists in order to
> > allow implementations of existing YANG version 1 modules together with
> > YANG version 1.1 modules.  Without this rule, updating a single module
> > to YANG version 1.1 would have a cascading effect on modules that
> > import it, requiring all of them to also be updated to YANG version
> > 1.1, and so on.
> 
> Again, perhaps expand 'vice versa' to be very clear.

Ok.

> The interesting case here if I understand things correctly is a YANG
> version 1 module or submodule importing from a YANG 1.1 module, which
> is legal if the import is without a revision. Hm. So in order to avoid
> a cascading effect, I have to avoid import by revision and then I am
> golden?

No you don't have to import by revision, according to the proposed rule.

> What about importing by revision the last revision that is
> still YANG 1?

Sure, this is ok.

> I heard that may be troublesome with the YANG library

No, this works fine w/ YANG library.

> but then perhaps the problem is there? I mean, if I import something
> that only exists in a 1.1 version, should I then not really upgrade to
> 1.1 as well?

Sure.  The use case is for example servers that implement ietf-ip
(which imports ietf-interfaces), and ietf-interfaces.  Suppose we
update ietf-interfaces to 1.1.  It should still be ok for a server to
implement ietf-ip with the new ietf-interfaces.

> Would it not work if an import of ietf-interfaces from a
> version 1 module simply resolves to the latest ietf-interfaces
> revision that is still version 1?

But that would mean either that a server is stuck implementing version
1 modules, or that the server must implement both the version 1 and
version 1.1 module - and we have already said that this isn't
possible.

A set of simpler rules would be:

   A YANG version 1.1 module MUST NOT include a version 1 module.
   A YANG version 1 module MUST NOT include a version 1.1 module.

   A YANG version 1.1 (sub)module MAY import a version 1 module.
   A YANG version 1 (sub)module MAY import a version 1.1 module.




/martin

_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

Reply via email to