On 11/15/2017 01:20 PM, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
Vladimir Vassilev <[email protected]> wrote:
[...]
It is clear that datastores with non-identical models can not be
supported with yang-library:1.0. However for the many usecases that do
not require the complexity of having different datastore models
(variation of the set of modules and the relevant deviations e.g. more
complex datastore centric conformance model) one can implement NMDA
with yang-library:1.0.
My initial proposal was a change to draft-ietf-netconf-nmda-netconf-01
sec. 2.4. 'YANG Library Capability' to allow that usecase:
OLD:
Support for NMDA requires the server to implement at least revision
201X-XX-XX of the "ietf-yang-library"
...
NEW:
Support for NMDA with datastores with non-identical models requires
the server to implement at least revision 201X-XX-XX of the
"ietf-yang-library"
But that would imply that we keep two versions of ietf-yang-library
around, and "current".
Also note that the new proposed version is very similar in structure
to the old yang library. And if the server implements "identicial
models", then the "not-implemented-in" will be empty, and so the
contents of yang-library 1.1 is more or less the same as yang-library
1.0.
I aggree with what you say. My point is that the upgrade to
yang-library:1.1 can come later then the upgrade to NMDA ietf-interfaces
<get-data> etc. I will implement yang-library:1.1 as soon as I find a
single usecase that justifies the work needed. At the moment I only have
motivation to implement <get-data> and migrate to the NMDA modules and
the only issue with that plan is the text in
draft-ietf-netconf-nmda-netconf-01 sec. 2.4. 'YANG Library Capability'.
Following my gut feeling I would rather wait to see if yang-library:1.2
is not coming up before I am done with the process of migrating to NMDA
with identical datastore models. A reasonable concern taking into
account yang-library:1.0 is about to be obsoleted so soon after the
publication of rfc7895 because of a feature (introduction of
datastore-centric conformance model) that has no value for me at the
moment unlike the feature (unification of configuration and state trees)
introduced with NMDA.
That said there might be a counter argument that the confusion of
allowing NMDA implementations with both yang-library:1.0 and
yang-library:1.1 is worse then forcing all NMDA applications to
implement only yang-library:1.1. If this is so that should be stated
clearly.
Vladimir
/martin
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
