Re: [netmod] Comments on schema mount draft

r protocols which > implement schema mount also adapt accordingly ? > >Eg: Something like, for transaction management, better to operate on one > mount-instance. This would not be correct. I think you are assuming one use case; where schema mount is used in a (primitive) or

Re: [netmod] js review of draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount-09

Hi, Thank you for this review! Comments inline. Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > Here is my review of draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount-09. > > * Abstract > >This document defines a mechanism to combine YANG modules into the >schema defined in other YANG modules. > > I do not know what

Re: [netmod] Comments on draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount-09

Hi, Thank you for your review. Comments inline. otili...@eurecom.fr wrote: > Hi members, > > I comment on that draft: > > * Instead of "it is often necessary that an existing module (or a set of > modules) is added to the data model starting at a non-root location", this > would read better:

Re: [netmod] Comments on schema mount draft

a future specialization of this mechanism. In the LNE and NI drafts, entities are "mounted" by creating entries in the corresponding lists. There is no need for a "mount" rpc in these cases. /martin > > > > > With Regards, > Rohit R > > Sen

Re: [netmod] Comments on schema mount draft

Hi, Rohit Ranade wrote: > Hi, > > Since the session management with Mounted devices, is not known to the > client, how will the client know how to configure NACM rules for the > inner devices ? Please provide an example use-case. > From the client perspective, all rules for a particular mounted

Re: [netmod] YANG 'must' Xpaths, predicates and wildcards

st[entry]/entry"; <- not sure about this one Yes. As would: must "../a-list[1=1]/entry"; must "../a-list[count(*) > 0]/entry"; etc; if you want to have a confusing expression instead of the simple: must "../a-list"; /martin > > Rgds, &g

Re: [netmod] YANG 'must' Xpaths, predicates and wildcards

"Sterne, Jason (Nokia - CA/Ottawa)" wrote: > Thanks Alex. Sorry about those sloppy mistakes. I agree about the > ../a-list and I should have said count > 0. > > In the 2nd part of my email, my intention was to only allow foo to be > configured if a-list has at least one entry configured. So I

Re: [netmod] YANG 'must' Xpaths, predicates and wildcards

Martin Bjorklund wrote: > Hi, > > "Sterne, Jason (Nokia - CA/Ottawa)" wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > I'm pretty sure that this xpath (e.g. in a must statement) isn't > > correct: > > > > (A) ../container-a/

Re: [netmod] YANG 'must' Xpaths, predicates and wildcards

Hi, "Sterne, Jason (Nokia - CA/Ottawa)" wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm pretty sure that this xpath (e.g. in a must statement) isn't > correct: > > (A) ../container-a/list-b[name=*]/some-leaf > > and should just be this instead: > > (B) ../container-a/list-b/some-leaf As

Re: [netmod] Comments on schema mount draft

Hi, Thank you for these comments, replies inline. Rohit Ranade wrote: > Hi All, > > Please find some comments for the schema mount draft. If I find any > other will send in another mail. > > Editorial: > > 1. Section 3.1 >"The "mount-point" statement MUST NOT be used in a YANG

Re: [netmod] kw review of draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount-09

Thanks for the quick review! Comments inline. Kent Watsen wrote: > > 1: paragraph starting w/ "In some cases", 1st sentence, s/often/sometimes/ fixed. > 2: add ref to RFC 8174 fixed. > 2.1: s/defines a label for/defines the label for/ > 3.1: > a) 2nd paragraph, s/defines a label for/defi

[netmod] A blind carbon copy

This is a blind carbon copy. --- Begin Message --- [Moving to NETCONF, Bcc:ing NETMOD] "Bogaert, Bart (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)" wrote: > Hi, > > We have a question about the following statement in the edit-config RPC > section: > > "If the operation contains multiple sub-operations > that apply t

Re: [netmod] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis-18: (with COMMENT)

Benoit Claise wrote: > On 3/8/2018 3:15 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 02:21:01PM +0100, Benoit Claise wrote: > >> I see two solutions from here. > >> 1. we mention "pyang -f yang --yang-canonical --keep-comments FILE" in > >> RFC6087bis, with a warning such as: "As t

Re: [netmod] default namespace in XPath

Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > Hi, > > sec. 6.4.1 in RFC 7950 says in the second bullet item: > > Names without a namespace prefix belong to the same namespace as > the identifier of the current node. > > It is unclear what "current node" means: > > 1. Is it the context node of the XPath exp

Re: [netmod] choice/case in tree diagrams

Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > On Tue, Mar 06, 2018 at 02:00:23PM +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 06, 2018 at 10:44:11AM +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > > > > > > > OLD: > > > >

Re: [netmod] choice/case in tree diagrams

Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > On Tue, Mar 06, 2018 at 10:44:11AM +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > > > OLD: > > > > is one of: > > rw for configuration data > > ro for non-configuration data, output parameters to rpcs > &g

Re: [netmod] choice/case in tree diagrams

Lou Berger wrote: > Martin, > > > On March 6, 2018 4:44:47 AM Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > After thinking some more about this, realizing that this document is > > in AUTH48, and looking at the first sentence in the Abstract: > > >

Re: [netmod] choice/case in tree diagrams

Mahesh Jethanandani wrote: > > > > On Mar 5, 2018, at 6:27 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > > > Martin Bjorklund mailto:m...@tail-f.com>> wrote: > >> Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > >>> On Mon, Mar 05, 2018 at 02:54:18PM +0100, Martin Bjorkl

Re: [netmod] choice/case in tree diagrams

> On 03/05/2018 06:40 PM, Per Hedeland wrote: > > On 2018-03-05 16:06, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > >> On Mon, 2018-03-05 at 15:49 +0100, Per Hedeland wrote: > >>> On 2018-03-05 15:41, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > >>>> On Mon, 2018-03-05 at 15:26 +0100, Martin Bj

Re: [netmod] choice/case in tree diagrams

Martin Bjorklund wrote: > Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 05, 2018 at 02:54:18PM +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > > > > > > > So it seems the running code got it right. ;-) > > > > > > As the author of that code, I think that

Re: [netmod] choice/case in tree diagrams

Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > On Mon, Mar 05, 2018 at 02:54:18PM +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > > > > > So it seems the running code got it right. ;-) > > > > As the author of that code, I think that was purely by accident... > > > > But I&#x

Re: [netmod] choice/case in tree diagrams

Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > On Mon, Mar 05, 2018 at 02:14:26PM +0100, Vladimir Vassilev wrote: > > On 03/05/2018 01:50 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > > > > > I prefer that the choice/case nodes do not have any flags since they > > > are not having a config true/false property on their own.

Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 (5274)

Hi, This errata is correct and should be accepted. I think the actual URI to use is less important, so the proposed URI is fine. /martin RFC Errata System wrote: > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7950, > "The YANG 1.1 Data Modeling Language". > > --

[netmod] choice/case in tree diagrams

Hi, Lifting this issue to its own thread. With this snippet: choice subnet { case prefix-length { leaf prefix-length { type uint8; } } case netmask { leaf netmask { type yang:dotted-quad; } } } pyang prints choi

Re: [netmod] Proposal for minimalist full NMDA support in schema mount

Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 04:09:21PM +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Christian Hopps wrote: > > > > > > Hi Rob, > > > > > > You do realize that no-one trying to actually deploy and run netw

Re: [netmod] Proposal for minimalist full NMDA support in schema mount

the RFC EDITOR queue, and reworked to be compliant > >> again, > >> and this very well could lead to discovering issues with your new > >> proposal. > >> Any new issues discovered in either the pending RFCs *or* in the new > >> solution > >>

Re: [netmod] Proposal for minimalist full NMDA support in schema mount

that others want to, and/or explore other solutions. That's *not* what I'm proposing. /martin > > Lou > > [1] > https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/interim-2016-netmod-01/session/netmod > > On 2/23/2018 4:36 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > Hi, > &g

Re: [netmod] Proposal for minimalist full NMDA support in schema mount

Hi, Robert Wilton wrote: > Hi Lou, > > I think that this solution is inferior to the model presented in > pre-09. I agree. Servers that are NMDA-compliant, or implements YANG Library bis will have to present schemas in two different structures, depending on where the schema is used, and client

Re: [netmod] LL review of draft-ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis-04

Hi, Thank you for this review. Comments inline. Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > Hi, > > here is my review of the rfc7895bis document: > > *** General comments > - This revision is a significant improvement necessary for > supporting NMDA. However, it is also flexible enough in that it >

Re: [netmod] [Netconf] LC of NDMA NETCONF/RESTCONF drafts

Andy Bierman wrote: > > > > Who needs all this to manage a network? > > > > > > I sometimes get comments from people about NETCONF defaults, like > "You think this is a standard? Why does a vendor get to decide what > is a default leaf?" > > CoMI has taken a different approach. > Every serv

Re: [netmod] [Netconf] LC of NDMA NETCONF/RESTCONF drafts

Hi, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > What we may consider, though, is to have a way to negate origin-filter > so that we can exclude specific origins - right now to emulate this > one has to (a) know all possible origins and then (b) list all origins > except the one not wanted. leaf-list includ

Re: [netmod] [Netconf] LC of NDMA NETCONF/RESTCONF drafts

Andy Bierman wrote: > It should be clear in some draft how basic-mode applies to origin=default > within . > > Applying sec 2 of 6243... > > config=true: > > If basic-mode=report-all then origin=default will never be present Note that origin=default can be used for more than just static YANG

Re: [netmod] Question on schema-mount

Hi, "Bogaert, Bart (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)" wrote: > Hi, > > We have a question w.r.t. deletion of entry in a list using mounted > schema knowing that in NC/Y there is no such thing as a "cascading > delete" (leafref constructions in many cases even makes it impossible > to delete a resource if it

Re: [netmod] Adoption Poll: draft-rtgyangdt-netmod-module-tags-02

Hi, In the light of this discussion, I would like to clarify that my support is for the problem of tagging *modules*, which I believe this draft is all about. I don't think we should extend this to tagging *nodes*; I think that requires a different mechanism. /martin Juergen Schoenwaelder wr

Re: [netmod] Question on range for parent-rel-pos in ietf-hatrdware.yang versus RFC 6933 entPhysicalParentRelPos

"Bogaert, Bart (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)" wrote: > Hi, > > During implementation we came across the following anomaly: > > According to RFC 6933 entPhysicalParentRelPos the value should be > set to -1 in case there is no parent. > The hardware YANG model defines this leaf as int32 with range "0 > ..

Re: [netmod] [Netconf] LC of NDMA NETCONF/RESTCONF drafts

gt; > > Thoughts? > > > > > This looks good. > > Showing the work... > > 1) there is no YANG default for parameter. > The behavior if this parameter is missing is determined by the operation Right. So in this case (get-data of operational), it would return all de

Re: [netmod] schema-mount pre09 branch

ally change the solution that the WG agreed upon. /martin Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > On Wed, 2018-02-07 at 11:41 +, Robert Wilton wrote: > > > > On 07/02/2018 10:29, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > > > On Wed, 2018-02-07 at 11:14 +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > >

Re: [netmod] schema-mount pre09 branch

Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > On Tue, Feb 06, 2018 at 03:25:52PM +, Robert Wilton wrote: > > > > I think that the term "external" could also be confusing, since I think that > > sort of implies peer mount like semantics. > > The "inline" mount concept seems to subsume peer mounts. From the

Re: [netmod] Adoption Poll: draft-rtgyangdt-netmod-module-tags-02

Hi, I support this document as a working group document. I do have some things to discuss, e.g., should we try to use a decentralized approach to tags instead of the proposed IANA registry (as it happens we have a mechanism for decentralized, hierarchical identifiers available :) One use case t

Re: [netmod] schema-mount pre09 branch

Hi, Thanks for your comments, see inline. Robert Wilton wrote: > Hi, > > Some comments on the pre-09 version, particularly the data model. > > > 1) I still don't get why this draft is called "YANG Schema Mount" > rather than "YANG Mount", since to me this implies that it *only* the > schema t

Re: [netmod] schema-mount pre09 branch

Hi Juergen, Thanks for your review, comments inline. Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 09:36:07PM +, Kent Watsen wrote: > > > > The authors created a "pre09" branch on GitHub a few weeks back. On this > > branch, they completed a full update of the draft. While waiti

Re: [netmod] [Netconf] LC of NDMA NETCONF/RESTCONF drafts

Hi, Mahesh Jethanandani wrote: > This closes the LC for the two NDMA drafts for NETCONF and RESTCONF. > > As part of the LC, there were a couple of comments/questions > raised. In particular > > - Vladmir reported an error, which Martin said is fixed in his local copy. Fixed. > - Robert sugg

Re: [netmod] [Netconf] LC on YANG Library (bis)

Mahesh Jethanandani wrote: > 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 > . The LC > will end on February 15. > > Please send your

Re: [netmod] RtgDir review: Review of draft-ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams-05.txt

Hi Stig, Thank you for your review! Comments inline. Stig Venaas wrote: > Hello, > > I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this > draft. The Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or > routing-related drafts as they pass through IETF last call and IESG > review

Re: [netmod] [Netconf] LC of NDMA NETCONF/RESTCONF drafts

Hi, Andy Bierman wrote: > Hi, > > I have some questions about these drafts. > > 1) what if datastore set to "conventional"? > There are many places where a datastore-ref type is used. > However, "conventional" is valid for base "datastore", even though > it is ambiguous as a datasto

Re: [netmod] [Netconf] LC of NDMA NETCONF/RESTCONF drafts

Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > Same here. And same here. /martin > > /js > > On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 06:55:32PM +, Kent Watsen wrote: > > > > I have read and support both drafts for advancement. > > > > Kent // co-author > > > > > > = original message = > > > > Authors and

Re: [netmod] YANG tree diagram uses

Michal Vaško wrote: > Hi, > > we have encountered some problem while implementing a feature from > draft-ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams-05, specifically not resolving > groupings and printing uses names instead (Section 2.2). > > We have 2 example models, A and B. A defines a container and a > g

Re: [netmod] Live meeting? and my opinion.

Hi, Christian Hopps wrote: > > Maybe a meeting at this point is useful? It would consolidate things and > get away from the endless email threads. > > If this isn't already known to everyone. There are many people for whom > the length of time to market from IETF simple doesn't work in particul

Re: [netmod] Closure - : WGLC - draft-ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams

Hi, I just posted draft-ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams-05.txt. It addressed the issue below, and the other WGLC issues: o the main tree now uses 2 spaces for indentation instead of 4 o added example for expanded/unexpanded grouping o fixed errors in the row syntax o aligned all ex

Re: [netmod] moving forward with schema mount

Hi, So do you believe that this decision reflects rough consensus in the WG? I hope that the document writeup will show that the WG is divided on this issue. For the record, if this means that using Schema Mount *with* NMDA gets delayed, I strongly object to this decision. Assuming this documen

Re: [netmod] schema mount and YANG library

Andy Bierman wrote: > Hi, > > > On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 9:44 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder < > j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de> wrote: > > > Thanks. The longer WG last call thread started with Rob's message in > > which he also asked about alignment with the YANG library update > > (posted Nov

Re: [netmod] Regarding IPR on draft-bierman-netmod-yang-data-ext-01

Lou Berger wrote: > Authors, Contributors, WG, > > As part of the preparation for WG adoption: > > Are you aware of any IPR that applies to drafts identified above? No, I'm not aware of any IPR that applies to this draft. /martin ___ netmod mailing

Re: [netmod] schema mount and YANG library

d, or > whose impact can be fully analyzed. > > Lou > > On January 19, 2018 3:59:22 AM Martin Bjorklund > wrote: > ... > > Hi, > > > > joel jaeggli wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 1/18/18 11:15 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > >> &

Re: [netmod] schema mount and YANG library

Hi, joel jaeggli wrote: > > > On 1/18/18 11:15 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > >> On Thu, 2018-01-18 at 14:39 +0100, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > >>> Ignoring process issues (not sure there are any), does it make sense > >&g

Re: [netmod] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7950 (5237)

Hi, This errata should be applied. It is an obvious typo. /martin RFC Errata System wrote: > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7950, > "The YANG 1.1 Data Modeling Language". > > -- > You may review the report below and at: > http://ww

Re: [netmod] schema mount and YANG library

is and > > > immediately working on the document that covers both. > > > > > > As I mentioned before I think this is as much a process issue as anything > > > else - and have a planned call to discuss possible directions with > > > chairs. I > > > h

Re: [netmod] schema mount and YANG library

Lou Berger wrote: > > > On 1/17/2018 11:18 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > ... > >>> My main concern is actually the YL version. I strongly think SM need > >>> to use YL-bis rather that the old YL, so that it can support NMDA. > >>> > >> R

Re: [netmod] schema mount and YANG library

Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > On Wed, 2018-01-17 at 17:18 +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > Lou Berger wrote: > > > > > > > > > On January 17, 2018 9:42:43 AM Martin Bjorklund > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Lou Berger wrote: >

Re: [netmod] schema mount and YANG library

Lou Berger wrote: > > > On January 17, 2018 9:42:43 AM Martin Bjorklund > wrote: > > > Lou Berger wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 1/17/2018 3:20 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > >> > Lou Berger wrote: > >> >> > >>

Re: [netmod] schema mount and YANG library

Lou Berger wrote: > > > On 1/17/2018 3:20 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > Lou Berger wrote: > >> > >> On 1/16/2018 11:15 AM, Robert Wilton wrote: > >>> On 16/01/2018 15:50, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > >>>> Lou Berger

Re: [netmod] WGLC - draft-ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams

Hi, Robert Wilton wrote: > On 17/01/2018 07:43, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > Alexander Clemm wrote: > >> +1 to (2) as preference, followed by (1). I don't think (3) is needed > >> here. The purpose is to make this human-readable and provide readers > >&

Re: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-15.txt

Hi, These errors seem to be issues with the tool, not the draft. /martin Benoit Claise wrote: > Hi Mahesh, > > There is an error with the yangdump-pro: > >Error: Feature 'match-on-eth and match-on-ipv4' not found for >if-feature statement >ietf-access-control-l...@2018-01-16.yang

Re: [netmod] schema mount and YANG library

Lou Berger wrote: > > > On 1/16/2018 11:15 AM, Robert Wilton wrote: > > > > On 16/01/2018 15:50, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > >> Lou Berger wrote: > >>> On 1/16/2018 10:13 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > >>> ... (trimming to topic) > >>

Re: [netmod] WGLC - draft-ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams

Alexander Clemm wrote: > +1 to (2) as preference, followed by (1). I don't think (3) is needed > here. The purpose is to make this human-readable and provide readers > a good sense of the overall structure. The authoritative > specification is still the .yang itself. Providing some guidance fo

Re: [netmod] schema mount and YANG library

Lou Berger wrote: > > > On 1/16/2018 10:13 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > ... (trimming to topic) > >>>>>>>> rejectected by the WG multiple times. FWIW there are drafts already > >>>>>>>> with > >>>>>>

Re: [netmod] WGLC - draft-ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams

Vladimir Vassilev wrote: > On 01/16/2018 11:56 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > > Vladimir Vassilev wrote: [...] > >> There is also undocumented alignment space count function before > >> that pyang uses to align the fields of child data leafs > >> wit

Re: [netmod] schema mount and YANG library

Lou Berger wrote: > > > On 1/16/2018 8:50 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > Lou Berger wrote: > >> > >> On January 16, 2018 8:24:42 AM Martin Bjorklund > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Lou Berger wrote: > >>>> La

Re: [netmod] schema mount and YANG library

Lou Berger wrote: > > > On January 16, 2018 8:24:42 AM Martin Bjorklund > wrote: > > > Lou Berger wrote: > >> Lada, > >> > >> > >> On January 16, 2018 7:07:15 AM Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > >> > >> > On Tue, 2018-0

Re: [netmod] schema mount and YANG library

Lou Berger wrote: > Lada, > > > On January 16, 2018 7:07:15 AM Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > > > On Tue, 2018-01-16 at 06:30 -0500, Lou Berger wrote: > >> Lada, > >> > >> It sounds like you are proposing in (1) a fairly significant change in > >> the > >> direction of the draft and in (2) a basic a

Re: [netmod] schema mount and YANG library

Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > On Tue, 2018-01-16 at 06:30 -0500, Lou Berger wrote: > > Lada, > > > > It sounds like you are proposing in (1) a fairly significant change in the > > direction of the draft and in (2) a basic approach that has been > > It is no change in direction, just a simplification

Re: [netmod] schema mount and YANG library

Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > Hi Lou, > > in my view, we should do the following two (significant) changes: > > 1. Instead of borrowing a grouping from ietf-yang-library and having > a parallel list of mounted schemas, we should keep *all* mounted > schemas directly in the YANG library and refer to t

Re: [netmod] WGLC - draft-ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams

Vladimir Vassilev wrote: > Hi, > > I have reviewed and implemented (apart from schema mount specific > functionality) draft-ietfetf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams-04 and found > the following issues: > > ==sec 2.6.  Node Representation== > > 1. To correctly reflect the current pyang output one needs

Re: [netmod] Reminder: WGLC - draft-ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams

Robert Wilton wrote: > > > On 15/01/2018 15:26, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > Robert Wilton wrote: > >> Hi Martin, > >> > >> All OK with me except where I have further comments/questions inline > >> below: > >> > >> On 15/01

Re: [netmod] Reminder: WGLC - draft-ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams

Robert Wilton wrote: > Hi Martin, > > All OK with me except where I have further comments/questions inline > below: > > On 15/01/2018 14:39, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Thanks for the review! Comments inline. > > > > Robert Wilton

Re: [netmod] Reminder: WGLC - draft-ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams

Hi, Thanks for the review! Comments inline. Robert Wilton wrote: > Hi Lou, Martin > > I've done a quick review of draft -04. > > It looks well written to me. > > I have a spotted a few minor nits/questions. > > Section 1: > > (i) "Such diagrams are commonly used to provided " => "Such diag

Re: [netmod] hi Martin, one issue about RFC7950 7.20.3.2. The "deviate" Statement, please help to confirm

Hi, This is an issue that has been reported before. It is tracked in https://github.com/netmod-wg/yang-next/issues/14. This said, I think in this particular case, where you define both the when expression and the if-feature leaf, I think the correct solution is to ensure that the when expression

Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-entity-06

;config false". As such they would not be configurable, and thus contain the detected values. If no value is detected, the node is not present. Note that 1 or 3 can be done in a future update to this module (or by a vendor). /martin Martin Bjorklund wrote: > Hi, > > "Bogaert, Bar

Re: [netmod] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-netmod-rfc7277bis-02: (with COMMENT)

Hi, Adam Roach wrote: > Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-netmod-rfc7277bis-02: No Objection [...] > -- > COMMENT: > -- >

Re: [netmod] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-netmod-entity-07: (with COMMENT)

Hi, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 10:55:46PM -0800, Adam Roach wrote: > > -- > > COMMENT: > > -- > > > > I have one correction and one

Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-entity-06

uch additional config objects to vendors, and simply make these three nodes config false in ietf-hardware. /martin > > Regards, Bart > > /martin > > > > > > Best regards, Bart > > > > -Original Message- > > From: netmod [mailto:netmod-boun

Re: [netmod] Last Call: (Network Management Datastore Architecture) to Proposed Standard two

Hi Tom, "tom p." wrote: > Much of this I-D is about the idea that network management data objects > can often take two different values. The I-D always refers to this as > being two values but is that a limit that this architecture imposes; or > can it be more? The I-D talks about two instantia

Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-entity-06

riginal Message- > From: netmod [mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Robert > Wilton > Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2017 4:14 PM > To: Martin Bjorklund ; netmod@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-entity-06 > > Hi Martin, > > &g

Re: [netmod] AD review: draft-ietf-netmod-revised-datastores-08

Robert Wilton wrote: > Hi Andy, > > > On 08/01/2018 19:45, Andy Bierman wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 5:55 AM, Robert Wilton > > wrote: > > > > Hi Andy, > > > > Regarding your comment below, this intent is captured by this text > > describing th

Re: [netmod] Kathleen Moriarty's Discuss on draft-ietf-netmod-rfc7277bis-01: (with DISCUSS)

Hi, Kathleen Moriarty wrote: > -- > DISCUSS: > -- > > Hello, > > I'm a little confused on the Security Consideration section as it doesn't use > the latest tem

Re: [netmod] Kathleen Moriarty's Discuss on draft-ietf-netmod-rfc7223bis-01: (with DISCUSS)

Hi, Kathleen Moriarty wrote: > -- > DISCUSS: > -- > > Hello, > > Thanks for your work on this draft. It appears an older version of the > Security Considerati

Re: [netmod] Netmod ACL - Can "access-lists" be set up as a "grouping"

"Acee Lindem (acee)" wrote: > Hi Jon, > > From: netmod mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org>> > on behalf of Jon Shallow > mailto:supjps-i...@jpshallow.com>> > Date: Monday, January 8, 2018 at 10:47 AM > To: "Robert Wilton -X (rwilton - ENSOFT LIMITED at Cisco)" > mailto:rwil...@cisco.com>>, > "netmod@

Re: [netmod] Netmod ACL - Can "access-lists" be set up as a "grouping"

Hi, Robert Wilton wrote: > Hi Einar, Jon, Mahesh, > > My gut instinct is that making this a grouping might not be a good > idea: > > 1) If somebody updates the core ACL model, will then need to check > that anyone using it should be similarly updated (unless they use > import-by-revision). > >

Re: [netmod] Yangdoctors last call review of draft-ietf-netmod-entity-07

Hi, Radek Krejčí wrote: > Reviewer: Radek Krejčí > Review result: Ready with Issues > > The document itself and normative parts seem fine to me, the only issue I see > is with the ietf-hardware-state module in non-normative appendix A. It seems > to > me that this temporary non-NMDA module does

Re: [netmod] draft-ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams - IPR verfication request

Igor Bryskin wrote: > Hi, > I have a question for the authors. > Today a yang-tree-diagram represents extended YANG groupings , which > often makes a tree hard to read/ understand. Do you think there could > be a way to represent groupings as collapsed? In draft -03, we added the option of printi

[netmod] Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8022bis-05

Reviewer: Martin Bjorklund Review result: Ready with Nits Hi, I have reviewed this document mainly from a NMDA perspective. As expected, the YANG model follows all conventions and looks good in general. Most of my comments below relate to NMDA terminology. o Abstract and Introdcution Both

Re: [netmod] *one* week 2nd WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revised-datastores-07

Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > On Thu, 2017-12-21 at 14:25 +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > > > Martin Bjorklund writes: > > > > > > > Hi Andy, > > > > > > > > Andy Bierman wrote: > > > >> Hi, &

Re: [netmod] xpaths and Wrapping Long Lines - draft-ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams-03

t 11:43, Juergen Schoenwaelder > > wrote: > > > > On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 11:39:47AM +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > > >> But this is in the YANG source; I think Ian asked about the tree > >> diagram syntax. Maybe the corresponding syntax in the

Re: [netmod] *one* week 2nd WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revised-datastores-07

Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > Martin Bjorklund writes: > > > Hi Andy, > > > > Andy Bierman wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> I have reviewed draft-07 and my previous comments about NMDA have been > >> addressed. > >> > >&g

Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-entity-06

Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 12:37:46PM +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I need WG input on this issue. The question is how to handle > > 'serial-num', 'mfg-name', and 'model-name'. I think they

Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-entity-06

ed with values for all nodes as detected by the implementation. If the /hardware/component list in the intended configuration is modified, then the system MUST behave as if it re-initializes itself, and follow the procedure in (1)."; /mart

Re: [netmod] xpaths and Wrapping Long Lines - draft-ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams-03

Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > Hi Ian, > > On Thu, 2017-12-21 at 10:42 +0100, Ian Farrer wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I’m just looking at the guidance on wrapping long lines given in Section > > 3.1. > > Unfortunately, this doesn’t cover the case where I refer to a long path. > > E.g: > > > > augment /na

Re: [netmod] AD review: draft-ietf-netmod-revised-datastores-08

Hi, Thanks for this review! Benoit Claise wrote: > Dear all, > > In order not to be the bottleneck in the process and assuming that the > document will be in "publication requested" pretty soon, here is my AD > review of draft-ietf-netmod-revised-datastores-08 > > - > > >5.3.2. Miss

Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-entity-06

Benoit Claise wrote: > Hi Martin, > > Thanks. > Only kept the relevant excerpts. > > > >> - Some objects are read-write in RFC6933: > >>entPhysicalSerialNum > >>entPhysicalAlias > >>entPhysicalAssetID > >>entPhysicalUris > >> > >> For example, entPhysicalSerialNum

Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-entity-06

Hi, Benoit Claise wrote: > Dear all, > > Here is my AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-entity-06. > Note that if you post the new version soon (before the end of this > week), I could start the IETF last call, and the draft could be on Jan > 11th IESG telechat. > > - I don't believe that the RFC 21

Re: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-revised-datastores-08.txt

of the IETF. > > Title : Network Management Datastore Architecture > Authors : Martin Bjorklund > Juergen Schoenwaelder > Phil Shafer > Kent Watsen >

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >