Hi Martin,
Thank you for your comments. Ok, agreed - it would be better to not introduce a
new mounted-schema 'type' term. Perhaps the wording "how the schema is mounted"
is a better alternative?
I've provided possible wording suggestions again below in brackets.
Section 3.3 – Page 7
The "/schema-mounts" container has the "mount-point" list as one of its
children. Every entry of this list refers through its key to a mount point and
specifies [how the schema is mounted, as either "inline" or "shared-schema"].
Section 3.3 - Page 8
An entry of the "mount-point" list can specify [how the schema is mounted] in
two different ways, "inline" or "shared-schema".
Section 9 - Page 13
A mount point defines a place in the node hierarchy where other data models may
be attached. A server that implements a module with a mount point populates the
/schema-mounts/mount-point list with detailed information on [whether the data
models mounted at each instance of a mount point MAY be different ("inline"
case) or if they MUST all have the same YANG library checksum ("shared-schema"
case). ]
[For a "shared-schema" mount-point list entry, the entry MAY include one or
more "parent-reference" list entries that are used to specify the context
nodeset for any XPath 1.0 expressions defined within the mounted schema.]
Section 9 - Page 14
list mount-point {
key "module label";
description
"Each entry of this list specifies [how the] schema for a particular mount
point [is mounted ("inline" or "shared-schema"). ]
Regards,
Hayden
-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Bjorklund [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, 6 August 2018 11:06 PM
To: Hayden Brown
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [netmod] Fwd: Re: YANG schema mount - any early
implementations?
Hi,
Hayden Brown <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Lou,
>
>
> Thank you for your response. In the new copy of the sections below I've
> attempted to convey how I think the paragraphs could read.
>
>
> In my mind, the main "point of ambiguity" is that it seemed the existing
> wording implies:
>
> * the mount-point list specifies which modules are mounted below the
> root of the mount point.
>
> however, I think we have all agreed that:
>
> * the mount-point list specifies the parent module that contains the
> mount-point,.
>
> I see this as just a subtle interpretation difference in the wording
> "specifies the mounted schema".
>
>
>
> Hopefully the wording (edited in the brackets) below better conveys my
> thoughts. Please feel free to correct me, or improve the wording below as you
> see fit.
>
> Section 3.3 – Page 7
> > The "/schema-mounts" container has the "mount-point" list as one of its
> > children. Every entry of this list refers through its key to a mount point
> > and specifies the [type of] mounted schema [as "inline" or "shared-schema"].
>
> Section 3.3 - Page 8
> > An entry of the "mount-point" list can specify the [type of] mounted schema
> > in two different ways, "inline" or "shared-schema".
The document does not define the "type" of a mounted schema, so I
don't think we should use that term in just a few places.
> Section 9 - Page 13
> > A mount point defines a place in the node hierarchy where other data models
> > may be attached. A server that implements a module with a mount point
> > populates the /schema-mounts/mount-point list with detailed information on
> > whether the [data models mounted at each instance of a mount point MAY be
> > different ("inline" case) or MUST all have the same YANG library checksum
> > ("shared-schema" case).
>
> For a "shared-schema" mount-point list entry, the entry MAY include one or
> more "parent-reference" list entries that are used to specify the context
> nodeset for any XPath 1.0 expressions defined within the mounted schema.]
>
>
> Section 9 - Page 14
> list mount-point {
> key "module label";
> description
> "Each entry of this list specifies [the type of] schema for a particular
> mount point [ ("inline" or "shared-schema") ].
>
>
> Thanks and best regards,
>
> Hayden
>
/martin
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Lou Berger <[email protected]>
> Sent: Friday, 3 August 2018 7:28 a.m.
> To: Hayden Brown; [email protected]
> Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [netmod] Fwd: Re: YANG schema mount - any early
> implementations?
>
>
> Hi,
>
> hopefully others will chime in too, but here's my view (as a user of
> schema mount, see https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-rtgwg-ni-model)...
>
> On 7/30/2018 7:27 PM, Hayden Brown wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> I just wanted to ask if it would be possible to clarify the intentions around
> some of the wording of the draft schema mount standard (Rev-10). In
> particular, regarding entries of the /schema-mounts/mount-points list.
>
> My interpretation is that the intended use of the /schema-mounts/mount-points
> list entries are to specify the parent modules that contain a mount point.
>
> yes
>
> Following on from this, the client should use the YANG library instance to
> determine which schema options can be mounted at the root of a mount point.
> This seems consistent with the examples of Appendix A of the draft standard.
>
> if you drop the word "options", then yes. Other examples can be found in
> draft-ietf-rtgwg-ni-model
>
>
> In this email I wanted to highlight the following sections of the draft RFC
> below. In my view they seem to me to be somewhat ambiguous, in implying that
> the mount-point list entries specify the *child* module (sub-schema):
>
>
> >From
> >https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount/?include_text=1
> Section 3.3 – Page 7
> > The "/schema-mounts" container has the "mount-point" list as one of its
> > children. Every entry of this list refers through its key to a mount point
> > and specifies the mounted schema.
>
> Section 3.3 - Page 8
> > An entry of the "mount-point" list can specify the mounted schema in two
> > different ways, "inline" or "shared-schema".
>
>
> Section 9 - Page 13
> > A mount point defines a place in the node hierarchy where other data models
> > may be attached. A server that implements a module with a mount point
> > populates the /schema-mounts/mount-point list with detailed information on
> > which data models are mounted at each mount point.
>
> Section 9 - Page 14
> list mount-point {
> key "module label";
> description
> "Each entry of this list specifies a schema for a particular mount point.
>
>
> I have reread the a few times and am having a hard time understand what
> should be changed. Can you suggest specific changes that would address your
> concern/comment? This might help to understand the issue you are seeing.
>
>
> The wording makes me wonder if these passages might actually just be
> "left-over" context from earlier revisions of the draft standard (Revision 8
> and prior) -- effectively referring back to the schema-mount 'use-schema'
> list.
>
> Again, I'm seeing the issue.
>
>
> I do of course acknowledge that it is entirely possible that I've
> misinterpreted the wording of the passages above, however if that is the
> case, I suspect I may not be the only one in future.
> And I'm sure I'm suffering from having spent way too much time on this topic
> so may be seeing things in the text that aren't actually there!
>
> Cheers,
> Lou
> (no hats)
>
>
> Many thanks for your time on this matter.
>
> Best regards,
> Hayden
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 20/07/2018 8:09 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 09:43:32AM +1200, hayden wrote:
>
>
>
> I understand that the schema mount proposal is still effectively in a
>
> state of flux, but are there any publicly visible implementations or
>
> deployments of a NETCONF or RESTCONF server that those interested could
>
> experiment with (e.g. to aid in client development)?
>
>
>
> State of flux? It is past WG last call and IETF last call.
>
>
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount/history/
>
>
>
> /js
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>
>
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
