Thanks Joe, I believe we are on the same page now, I am working on the example at the instance level now, will add them to the appendix. Thanks again for good comment.
-Qin -----邮件原件----- 发件人: Joe Clarke (jclarke) [mailto:[email protected]] 发送时间: 2022年4月14日 5:09 收件人: Qin Wu <[email protected]>; [email protected] 主题: Re: Feedback on Self-Describing Data Object Tags in YANG Data Models Thanks, Qin. See below. I had to get back into the tags groove. On 4/10/22 06:49, Qin Wu wrote: > Hi, Joe: > Sorry for late follow up. Thank for your comment, please see my reply below. > -----邮件原件----- >> 发件人: netmod [mailto:[email protected]] 代表 Joe Clarke (jclarke) >> 发送时间: 2022年3月22日 18:12 >> 收件人: [email protected] >> 主题: [netmod] Feedback on Self-Describing Data Object Tags in YANG >> Data Models Rob commented at the mic during the 113 meeting that using >> self-describing tags for specific data instances may be a design of this >> solution, but the text doesn't state that. > [Qin] Note that in ietf-data-object-tags, we use 'name' to identify > each data object, Therefore I can self-describing tag can be used > either for specific data instance or schema node, correct me if I am wrong. You do, yes. I think what Rob and I were requesting is an example that shows why I might use these at the instance level. > > Secondly, in this draft, we define three category of self-describing > tags: OPM tag, metric type tag and multi-source tag. > After having a second thinking of your suggestion and Rob's, it seems > OPM tag and metric type tag might be more suited for being used in the > schema level Since when the model is defined in the design stage, we may have > already known it. Please also see above clarification on how I understand how > self-describing tag is used for specific data instance. Not sure about the design phase. I was thinking more at the runtime level I'd know that a given instance of an interface, tunnel, etc. has some significance to which I'd assign a user: tag. I may or may not know this at design-time. > > As for multi-source tag, I sort of agree with you it can be used at > the data instance level, but I am not sure it cover the use case mentioned > below. > >> To add to the request to provide such text, it would be useful to have an >> example showing this. >> One potential use I can think of for this is to use user tags to >> self-describe the instance of an interface to be "critical" or high-priority >> for purposes of more aggressive monitoring/telemetry subscriptions, etc. > [Qin] Thanks Joe for proposed use, See above clarification, I am not sure > this case has been covered by one of self-describing tag described above. > maybe we can expand multi-source tag or introduce a new self-describing tag > to cover your use case, but one thing I am not sure whether I can enumerate > all other use cases in this self-describing tags draft. Comments,suggestions > and input? I don't think you need to describe all use cases. I think one showing an instance may be sufficient. I was re-reading your tunnel example. Let's say I have a tunnel instance "foo" that corresponds to customer example.com. Could I not create user:customer_example_com tags on instances of the property and metrics (as well as related objects) to help me identify data for that customer? Joe _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
