On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 02:31:15AM +0000, Rohit R Ranade wrote:
> Hi All,
>
>
> 1. "import-only-module" is currently under the "module-set" list. How
> does the client benefit by learning which module-set imports which modules ?
All non import-only modules of the schema are implemented
with their associated features and deviations.
Modules in module-set/module are modules a datastore referencing the module set
implements, modules in module-set/import-only-module are modules a datastore
referencing the module set only imports from.
> 2. Whether we can keep the "import-only-module" as a sibling to
> module-set. And let it list all the imported modules.
A module set is a self contained set of modules and import only modules.
[Rohit R Ranade] One use-case I thought of was that a client was concerned with
only some data-stores. So they can download the schema of only those modules
and their imported modules of their data-stores of interest. But if this was
the case, then the "checksum" is of no use to them, as they will not know
whether their intended data-store changed or not. Is there any other use-case
for the import-only-module being part of module-set ?
> 3. Section 3 mentions the text "A common use case is the operational state
> datastore schema which is a
> superset of the schema used by conventional configuration datastores. ".
> ==> I think it should be "maybe a superset" based on Point 3 of "Objectives"
> section.
Perhaps 'which is commonly a superset'. But note that the point 3 in the
objectives also covers any future datastores such as ephemeral datastores what
may have data models that do not relate to <operational>.
[Rohit R Ranade] I agree, your suggestion for this change is better.
> 4. Also I feel the text about "netconf-capability-change" notification
> based on yang-library checksum should be moved to the NETCONF NMDA draft. Is
> it not more suitable there ?
The reason is that NMDA is a very generic architectural document and as such it
should not detail specifics of concrete notifications.
These details belong into the specific documents. The NMDA document is a root
of a document dependency tree, we should not create a mesh of document
dependencies.
[Rohit R Ranade] Please note I mentioned " should be moved to the NETCONF NMDA
draft ", by which I meant draft-ietf-netconf-nmda-netconf-05, not the RFC 8342
/js
--
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
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
