My proposal is to add this to the YANG data model.  I think this logically 
belongs to YANG library which is why I would like to see it there.  I also 
think it will be useful to many implementations.  All, probably not, but they 
have also survived without YANG library for a while:-) Of course, it is always 
possible to write another draft or do a bisbis.  
Cheers
--- Alex

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2018 12:29 PM
> To: Alexander Clemm <alexander.cl...@huawei.com>
> Cc: Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanand...@gmail.com>; NETCONF WG
> <netc...@ietf.org>; NETMOD WG <netmod@ietf.org>
> Subject: Re: [netmod] [Netconf] LC on YANG Library (bis)
> 
> I must have missed your actionable proposal that is relevant for _all_ NETCONF
> and RESTCONF implementations.
> 
> YANG data models are extensible so lets use that.
> 
> /js
> 
> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 07:58:37PM +0000, Alexander Clemm wrote:
> > Well, we need a general solution for that.  YANG-push is just one use case.
> There are other cases where there will be "metadata" (that does not pertain to
> instance data)  and capabilities that clients want to discover.  YANG library 
> (in
> itself providing "metadata" about what a server supports and is capable of) 
> is an
> excellent place to maintain this information.  It also provides the 
> opportunity to
> be systemic about it, as opposed to requiring everyone to define their own 
> little
> custom extensions.
> > --- Alex
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Juergen Schoenwaelder
> > > [mailto:j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2018 11:48 AM
> > > To: Alexander Clemm <alexander.cl...@huawei.com>
> > > Cc: Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanand...@gmail.com>; NETCONF WG
> > > <netc...@ietf.org>; NETMOD WG <netmod@ietf.org>
> > > Subject: Re: [netmod] [Netconf] LC on YANG Library (bis)
> > >
> > > Alexander,
> > >
> > > I disagree. This YANG Library is mandatory for all implementations;
> > > what you talk about seems to concern only implementations that
> > > support YANG push. Hence, this is an extension that should go in its own
> module.
> > >
> > > /js
> > >
> > > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 07:38:31PM +0000, Alexander Clemm wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > I have taken a look at this document.
> > > >
> > > > My main comment is that one aspect that is missing, that I believe
> > > > should be
> > > added, concerns the inclusion of certain metadata about the modules.
> > > Specifically, in the context of YANG-Push we had a discussion about
> > > being able to mark nodes that are notifiable on change.  This is
> > > just one particular use case of a more general issue; in YANG-Push
> > > after much debate the conclusion was for now to simply make
> > > implementors aware of this issue and advise that a solution to this
> > > must be provided, with the clear understanding that eventually a standard
> solution should be defined.
> > > >
> > > > Since the goal of YANG-Library is to allow clients to find out
> > > > what is actually
> > > supported on a given server, this is the right place to keep this
> > > information.  One possible way to address this would be, for a given
> > > module, to maintain a list of "meta-info", with a key "meta-tag",
> > > and a list with references to the nodes to which the metadata
> > > applies.  In the case of notifiable-on-change, you would have a list
> > > with one entry "notifiable-on-change", and then the list with the node
> definitions to which this tag applies.
> > > >
> > > > Editorial nit:
> > > > 2nd paragraph Introduction: informaton --> information
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > > --- Alex
> > > >
> > > > From: Netconf [mailto:netconf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> > > > Mahesh Jethanandani
> > > > Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2018 11:00 AM
> > > > To: NETCONF WG <netc...@ietf.org>
> > > > Cc: NETMOD WG <netmod@ietf.org>
> > > > Subject: [Netconf] LC on YANG Library (bis)
> > > >
> > > > WG,
> > > >
> > > > The authors of rfc7895bis have indicated that they believe the
> > > > document is
> > > ready for LC[1].
> > > >
> > > > This starts a two week LC on the
> > > > draft<https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-
> > > netconf-rfc7895bis-04>. The LC will end on February 15.
> > > >
> > > > Please send your comments on this thread. Reviews of the document,
> > > > and
> > > statement of support are particularly helpful to the authors. If you
> > > have concerns about the document, please state those too.
> > > >
> > > > Authors please indicate if you are aware of any IPR on the document.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks.
> > > >
> > > > [1]
> > > > https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netconf/current/msg13980.htm
> > > > l
> > > >
> > > > Mahesh & Kent
> > > >
> > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > netmod mailing list
> > > > netmod@ietf.org
> > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
> > > Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
> > > Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <https://www.jacobs-university.de/>
> 
> --
> Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
> Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
> Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <https://www.jacobs-university.de/>

_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

Reply via email to