Lou Berger <[email protected]> wrote:
> Martin,
>
> On 2/4/2016 3:22 PM, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> > The way I understand the requirement from Lou et. al, which is also
> > what structural mount supports, is a way to mount (or "relocate") a
> > set of modules under a certain path. Currently the complete subtrees
> > defined by this module set is mounted. This includes any augments.
> > So for example, if you mount ietf-interfaces and ietf-ip under /x:foo,
> > the result would be:
> >
> > /x:foo/if:interfaces/if:interface/ip:ipv4/...
> > /x:foo/if:interfaces/if:interface/ip:ipv6/...
> >
> > etc.
> >
> > Structural mount does not currently support mounting of specific
> > subtrees.
> >
> > I agree with Juergen that the term "top-level module" maybe is
> > misleading. (In fact, I thought that this term refered to something
> > else - once you have mounted ietf-interfaces in the module "x" as
> > above, I thought that "x" was the top-level module, and ietf-interface
> > was the non-top-level module).
>
> So what's a better way of referring to the type of mounted module?
In my view, any module can be mounted.
Your original email had:
1. that there be a mechanism that allows the incorporation (or
'mounting') of the data model defined by one top-level module
within another module.
I think the word "top-level" can simply be removed from this
sentence.
/martin
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
