-----Original Message-----
From: Ladislav Lhotka [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: 04 January 2019 18:22
To: Rohit R Ranade <[email protected]>; [email protected]
Subject: RE: [netmod] Schema Mount with Inline Type
Rohit R Ranade <[email protected]> writes:
> Hi,
>
> I donot have a specific scenario as of now. But the scenario used in the
> draft is that a module which is mounted needs to refer to its parent-schema.
> I donot see how that is related to "mount point instances having
> shared-schema or different schema".
>
> If we look at the LNE draft, I think it avoids the "parent-reference"
> by having a " bind-lne-name" which binds the interface to the LNE and
> also creates a "system" configuration for that interface inside the
> LNE instance. So the interface references inside the mount jail get
> resolved.
If I understand it correctly (maybe not), the "bind-lne-name" is used at the
level of Network Device to assign an interface to a configured LNE. This
information IMO is not meaningful inside the LNE itself. If it is so, there is
in fact no parent reference.
>
> So in future, if "inlined" schema needs to use parent-schema, it needs
> to use a "bind" mechanism to add entries from the module in
> parent-schema to the same module under mount-point ?
In my view, the inline case makes only sense in the split management scenario
where each mount jail is managed via a separate NC/RC server. In this case it
makes no sense to refer to data outside the mount jail.
My standard complaint is that schema mount mixes up two rather different
concepts: the shared-schema case is a data modelling concept whereas the inline
case is more about combining instance data. This causes a lot of complexity and
confusion.
[Rohit R Ranade] +1
Lada
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ladislav Lhotka [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: 02 January 2019 19:29
> To: Rohit R Ranade <[email protected]>; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [netmod] Schema Mount with Inline Type
>
> Hi Rohit,
>
> Rohit R Ranade <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> module: ietf-yang-schema-mount
>> +--ro schema-mounts
>> +--ro namespace* [prefix]
>> | +--ro prefix yang:yang-identifier
>> | +--ro uri? inet:uri
>> +--ro mount-point* [module label]
>> +--ro module yang:yang-identifier
>> +--ro label yang:yang-identifier
>> +--ro config? boolean
>> +--ro (schema-ref)
>> +--:(inline)
>> | +--ro inline!
>> +--:(shared-schema)
>> +--ro shared-schema!
>> +--ro parent-reference* yang:xpath1.0
>>
>> Any reason for not adding "parent-reference" for "inline" type ? What
>> is the solution for the modules defined under such mount points to
>> refer to parent schema ?
>
> The inline case was intentionally designed with an impenetrable "mount jail".
> Do you see any use case where parent references are needed and the
> "shared-schema" strategy cannot be used?
>
> Lada
>
>>
>> With Regards,
>> Rohit
>> _______________________________________________
>> netmod mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>
> --
> Ladislav Lhotka
> Head, CZ.NIC Labs
> PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67
--
Ladislav Lhotka
Head, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
