On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 7:44 AM, Balazs Lengyel <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hello,
>
> 1) Will mounted YANG modules be listed in the base ietf-yang-library? Even
> the mounted ones?
>

Does the server providing the mounted modules claim conformance
to those models?

IMO YANG mount breaks the "YANG API contract" if even 1 tiny
property is ignored, due to mounting.

I asked for a conformance enum of 'none' or 'other' for this exact purpose
but
the WG did not think it was possible for a server to do anything
other than implement or import a YANG module.

E.g, we are building a special server "library-mode" that just
provided\s the library and get-schema for every module.
They will all be listed as 'imported' (so that enum essentially
becomes 'other')


2) What does conformance to a YANG  module e.g. ietf-system mean now? Do we
> need to load the module at the top level, or is it enough to mount it
> “somewhere” in the containment tree?
>


It means the same if the server returns "implement"
Mounting the module violates the contract because the
module clearly defines /system as a top-level node.
Any other location is non-compliant.


3) If the answer to 2) is it can be mounted anywhere, which modules must be
> present at the top level? E.g. ietf-yang-library?
>

IMO the YANG contract only supports the data placement explicit
in the module.


> 4) If a new list entry is created can it introduce a completely new module
> never heard of before in the network element?
>

??

this is fine for "anydata"

5) IMHO allowing such dynamic introduction of new YANG modules into a
> network element, with flexible mountpoints, flexible set of modules at each
> mountpoint, a flexible set of deviations and features for each mounted
> module makes discovery actual available schema tree difficult. I think we
> are providing to much flexibility, over-complicating the issue. Some more
> static mounting solution that can be read from YANG modules instead of
> run-time data would be easier.
>

mount is way over-engineered  but schema-defined mount-points don't really
help.
A nested "root" works and has a use-case.  Everything else is extra
and an implementation choice without any real use-case.  YANG is already
complicated and slow. mount and sym-links makes it worse.

regards Balazs
>
>
>

Andy


>
> --
> Balazs Lengyel                       Ericsson Hungary Ltd.
> Senior Specialist
> Mobile: +36-70-330-7909              email: [email protected]
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>
>
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

Reply via email to