Hi Lada, I think some of what you're getting at is in these guidelines:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netmod-revised-datastores-01#section-5 But you're thinking about something more generalized? Kent // contributor -----ORIGINAL MESSAGE----- > On 17 Mar 2017, at 15:46, Robert Wilton <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On 17/03/2017 14:32, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: >>> On 17 Mar 2017, at 15:04, Robert Wilton <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Would 7950bis be allowed to have a normative reference to an Informational >>> RFC that defined the YANG datastores? >> My idea is that 7950bis should be made independent of any particular set of >> datastores, so such a normative reference shouldn't be needed. > OK, if 70590bis was entirely datastore agnostic, then there would need to be > a description of how YANG applies to a particular set of datastores (in > particular the config: true|false statement), and which datastores are > validated. Would that go in the revised I don't think that config true/false is necessarily tied to a particular set of datastores, it can be generalized to RW/RO. > datastores architecture or somewhere else? It wouldn't make sense to have > to repeat this for every network configuration protocol. I think the structure of datastores and validation workflow could be supplied as extra info, see item #3 near the end of this message: https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netmod/current/msg17673.html Lada > > Thanks, > Rob > > >> >> Lada >> >>> If we did a 7950bis document (and it isn't clear that one is actually >>> required to support the revised datastores draft) then does that mean we >>> would also need to have a new version of YANG? >>> >>> That would potentially seem like a backwards step. Also what would it mean >>> for an implementation that is aware of the new datastores but is using a >>> mix of YANG modules with different versions? >>> >>> I don't understand why the revised datastores draft should not be standards >>> track once the various appendices have been moved out, noting that they are >>> really only in the one draft at this stage because it seemed like that >>> would make it easier for folks to review and comment on. >>> >>> Is the only issue here which WG the draft is being worked on? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Rob >>> >>> >>> On 17/03/2017 13:22, Mehmet Ersue wrote: >>>> I think YANG identities should be standardized with 7950bis. >>>> >>>> Mehmet >>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Lou Berger [mailto:[email protected]] >>>>> Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2017 12:28 PM >>>>> To: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email protected]>; >>>>> Mehmet Ersue <[email protected]> >>>>> Cc: 'Kent Watsen' <[email protected]>; [email protected] >>>>> Subject: Re: [netmod] draft netmod charter update proposal >>>>> >>>>> Juergen, >>>>> >>>>> Thank you for the input. I think your point highlights how the technical >>>>> contents of a document drives the intended status of a document. >>>>> >>>>> Lou >>>>> >>>>> PS as a reminder to all, intended status of documents is *not* typically >>>>> included in charters and are not included in the distributed version. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On March 16, 2017 2:44:53 AM Juergen Schoenwaelder >>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 02:50:06PM +0100, Mehmet Ersue wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> That said different people including Netconf WG co-chairs think the DS >>>>>>> concept document is Informational in nature and should be published as >>>>> an >>>>>>> Informational concept to be used in and adopted for the needs in >>>> diverse >>>>>>> protocol WGs. This is as I think also important to avoid an overlapping >>>>>>> between NETCONF and NETMOD charters. >>>>>> The current datastore draft includes concrete YANG idenity definitions >>>>>> for datastores and origins and these definitions better be standards >>>>>> track. >>>>>> >>>>>> /js >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH >>>>>> Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany >>>>>> Fax: +49 421 200 3103 <http://www.jacobs-university.de/> >>>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> netmod mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod >>>> . >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> netmod mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod >> -- >> Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs >> PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67 >> >> >> >> >> >> . -- Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67 _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
