On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 5:33 AM, Martin Bjorklund <[email protected]> wrote:

> Andy Bierman <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 3:45 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder <
> > [email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 08:55:19AM +0000, Scharf, Michael (Nokia - DE)
> > > wrote:
> > > > > I come at this from the classification angle, so my interest is if
> the
> > > assumption that
> > > > > a YANG model can only be classified as a network service model XOR
> a
> > > network device model
> > > > > according to the definitions in
> > > draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification (sections 2.1
> > > > > and 2.2). Based on this discussion I take it that some models are
> > > intended to be able to
> > > > > serve in both roles. And we should make sure that it’s supported in
> > > our catalog structure.
> > > >
> > > > Regarding the XOR assumption for classification:
> > > >
> > > > You may also want to think about YANG models that are NEITHER device
> NOR
> > > service models. For instance, what about RFC 6991? And I think other,
> more
> > > technical models presented this week may fall into a similar category
> > > ("generic"?).
> > > >
> > >
> > > RFC 6991 is not really defining a data model, while ietf-yang-types
> > > and ietf-inet-types are both YANG modules they do not define any data
> > > nodes that can be implemented. Lets look at RFC 6020bis:
> > >
> > >    o  data model: A data model describes how data is represented and
> > >       accessed.
> > >
> > > Anyway, the point is that RFC 6991 do not define any data nodes and
> > > hence nothing that can be accessed. Perhaps it helps to import
> > > terminology into the model classification document and to be explicit
> > > that not all YANG modules define YANG data models.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > I brought this issue up for YANG 1.1 but there was no interest
> > or agreement that there is any problem or confusion.
> >
> > http://www.netconfcentral.org/modulereport/iana-crypt-hash
> >
> > Consider iana-crypt-hash that only contains  1 typedef and 3 features
> > that relate to implementation of that typedef.  According to YANG 1.1
> > and the YANG library, a server implement MUST NOT claim it
> > implements iana-crypt-hash.  Instead the server must say "I import
> > this module, but implement the features".  How can one implement
> > something that is supposedly only imported?  Very confusing.
>
> ietf-yang-library and 6020bis(*) uses the phrase "supported
> features".  So, a server can advertise a module as imported, and list
> the supported features.
>
> (*) 6020bis actually uses the phrase "implement a feature" in one
> sentence (last sentence in 7.20.1).  This should probably be changed
> to "support a feature" in order to avoid confusion.
>
>
>
How does one support a feature without implementing it?
This terminology is inconsistent and confusing.



> /martin
>

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

Reply via email to