> On 18 Nov 2015, at 16:10, Andy Bierman wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 11:03 PM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>
> > On 17 Nov 2015, at 21:18, Andy Bierman wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 12:11 PM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> >
> > > On 17 Nov 2015, at 21:03, Ladislav Lhotka
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 11:03 PM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>
> > On 17 Nov 2015, at 21:18, Andy Bierman wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 12:11 PM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> >
> > > On 17 Nov 2015, at 21:03, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >> On 17 Nov 2015, at 18:08, Andy Bi
> On 18 Nov 2015, at 09:36, Juergen Schoenwaelder
> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 08:03:02AM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>>
>>
>> And yes, I think we are wasting time. Seeking interoperability where there
>> is none is useless. I propose this change to sec. 5.6 of the yang-json
>> do
On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 08:03:02AM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>
>
> And yes, I think we are wasting time. Seeking interoperability where there is
> none is useless. I propose this change to sec. 5.6 of the yang-json document:
>
> OLD
>An anyxml instance is encoded as a JSON name/value pa
> On 17 Nov 2015, at 21:18, Andy Bierman wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 12:11 PM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>
> > On 17 Nov 2015, at 21:03, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> On 17 Nov 2015, at 18:08, Andy Bierman wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 6:44 AM, Ladislav
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 12:11 PM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>
> > On 17 Nov 2015, at 21:03, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> On 17 Nov 2015, at 18:08, Andy Bierman wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 6:44 AM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 17 Nov 2015, at 11:19, Robert Wi
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 10:43 AM, Randy Presuhn <
randy_pres...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> Hi -
>
> > From: Robert Wilton
> > Sent: Nov 17, 2015 2:19 AM
> ...
> >As a possible compromise, what about something like:
> >
> >The JSON encoding defines that anyxml may be encoded in whatever way
>
> On 17 Nov 2015, at 21:03, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>
>>
>> On 17 Nov 2015, at 18:08, Andy Bierman wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 6:44 AM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>>
>>> On 17 Nov 2015, at 11:19, Robert Wilton wrote:
>>>
>>> As a possible compromise, what about something like:
> On 17 Nov 2015, at 18:08, Andy Bierman wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 6:44 AM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>
> > On 17 Nov 2015, at 11:19, Robert Wilton wrote:
> >
> > As a possible compromise, what about something like:
> >
> > The JSON encoding defines that anyxml may be encoded in w
Hi -
> From: Robert Wilton
> Sent: Nov 17, 2015 2:19 AM
...
>As a possible compromise, what about something like:
>
>The JSON encoding defines that anyxml may be encoded in whatever way
>the implementor finds useful, or even not at all. If a preferred
>custom encoding is not being
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 6:44 AM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>
> > On 17 Nov 2015, at 11:19, Robert Wilton wrote:
> >
> > As a possible compromise, what about something like:
> >
> > The JSON encoding defines that anyxml may be encoded in whatever way the
> implementor finds useful, or even not at al
> On 17 Nov 2015, at 11:19, Robert Wilton wrote:
>
> As a possible compromise, what about something like:
>
> The JSON encoding defines that anyxml may be encoded in whatever way the
> implementor finds useful, or even not at all. If a preferred custom
> encoding is not being used, then
As a possible compromise, what about something like:
The JSON encoding defines that anyxml may be encoded in whatever way the
implementor finds useful, or even not at all. If a preferred custom
encoding is not being used, then it is suggested that anyxml data be
encoded as a string containing
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 3:55 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder <
j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 14, 2015 at 09:05:00AM -0800, Andy Bierman wrote:
> >
> > YANG 1.1 is going to take 2 more years if we slowly revisit every issue.
> > I thought the whole point of the issue tracker
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 03:04:31PM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>
> >>> Andy, please note that this is a discussion primarily around the JSON
> >>> document and not around the YANG 1.1 document.
> >>
> >> Except that it might be useful to clarify in 6020bis whether "anyxml"
> >> really means
>
> On 16 Nov 2015, at 14:40, Juergen Schoenwaelder
> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 01:09:20PM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>>
>>> On 16 Nov 2015, at 12:55, Juergen Schoenwaelder
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sat, Nov 14, 2015 at 09:05:00AM -0800, Andy Bierman wrote:
YANG 1.1 is goin
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 01:09:20PM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>
> > On 16 Nov 2015, at 12:55, Juergen Schoenwaelder
> > wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Nov 14, 2015 at 09:05:00AM -0800, Andy Bierman wrote:
> >>
> >> YANG 1.1 is going to take 2 more years if we slowly revisit every issue.
> >> I thou
> On 16 Nov 2015, at 12:55, Juergen Schoenwaelder
> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Nov 14, 2015 at 09:05:00AM -0800, Andy Bierman wrote:
>>
>> YANG 1.1 is going to take 2 more years if we slowly revisit every issue.
>> I thought the whole point of the issue tracker was to prevent this sort
>> of thing.
On Sat, Nov 14, 2015 at 09:05:00AM -0800, Andy Bierman wrote:
>
> YANG 1.1 is going to take 2 more years if we slowly revisit every issue.
> I thought the whole point of the issue tracker was to prevent this sort
> of thing. The rule should be "what new details have emerged that
> should cause u
On Sat, Nov 14, 2015 at 1:27 AM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>
> > On 13 Nov 2015, at 19:19, Andy Bierman wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 11:51 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder <
> j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de> wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 08:10:51AM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote
> On 13 Nov 2015, at 19:19, Andy Bierman wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 11:51 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder
> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 08:10:51AM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> > Juergen Schoenwaelder writes:
> >
> > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 03:14:13PM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka w
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 11:51 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder <
j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 08:10:51AM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> > Juergen Schoenwaelder writes:
> >
> > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 03:14:13PM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > On
> On 12 Nov 2015, at 08:51, Juergen Schoenwaelder
> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 08:10:51AM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>> Juergen Schoenwaelder writes:
>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 03:14:13PM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> On 11 Nov 2015, at 14:59, Juergen Schoenwaelder
On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 08:10:51AM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> Juergen Schoenwaelder writes:
>
> > On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 03:14:13PM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> >>
> >> > On 11 Nov 2015, at 14:59, Juergen Schoenwaelder
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> > On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 02:53:49PM +0
Juergen Schoenwaelder writes:
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 03:14:13PM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>>
>> > On 11 Nov 2015, at 14:59, Juergen Schoenwaelder
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 02:53:49PM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> On 11 Nov 2015, at 14:44, Juergen Schoe
Randy Presuhn writes:
> Hi -
>
>>From: Juergen Schoenwaelder
>>Sent: Nov 11, 2015 5:44 AM
>>To: Ladislav Lhotka
>>Cc: netmod@ietf.org
>>Subject: Re: [netmod] JSON encoding of anyxml
> ...
>>Observations:
>>
>> - Except b), none of the
Hi -
>From: Juergen Schoenwaelder
>Sent: Nov 11, 2015 5:44 AM
>To: Ladislav Lhotka
>Cc: netmod@ietf.org
>Subject: Re: [netmod] JSON encoding of anyxml
...
>Observations:
>
> - Except b), none of the options is interoperable. Option d) is
> interoperable for t
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 08:31:14AM -0800, Andy Bierman wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 7:32 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder <
> j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 03:14:13PM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> > >
> > > > On 11 Nov 2015, at 14:59, Juergen Schoenwaeld
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 7:32 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder <
j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 03:14:13PM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> >
> > > On 11 Nov 2015, at 14:59, Juergen Schoenwaelder <
> j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, No
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 03:14:13PM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>
> > On 11 Nov 2015, at 14:59, Juergen Schoenwaelder
> > wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 02:53:49PM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 11 Nov 2015, at 14:44, Juergen Schoenwaelder
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On W
> On 11 Nov 2015, at 14:59, Juergen Schoenwaelder
> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 02:53:49PM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>>
>>> On 11 Nov 2015, at 14:44, Juergen Schoenwaelder
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 02:24:15PM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>
> I wro
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 02:53:49PM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>
> > On 11 Nov 2015, at 14:44, Juergen Schoenwaelder
> > wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 02:24:15PM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> I wrote 'effectively deprecated' and here is the text in 6020bis.
> >>>
> On 11 Nov 2015, at 14:44, Juergen Schoenwaelder
> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 02:24:15PM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I wrote 'effectively deprecated' and here is the text in 6020bis.
>>>
>>> Since the use of anyxml limits the manipulation of the content, it is
>>> REC
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 02:24:15PM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>
> >
> > I wrote 'effectively deprecated' and here is the text in 6020bis.
> >
> > Since the use of anyxml limits the manipulation of the content, it is
> > RECOMMENDED that the "anyxml" statement not be used to define
> > c
> On 11 Nov 2015, at 13:26, Juergen Schoenwaelder
> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 11:54:58AM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>>
>>> On 11 Nov 2015, at 09:07, Juergen Schoenwaelder
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 07:34:23AM +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
Andy Bierman wrot
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 11:54:58AM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>
> > On 11 Nov 2015, at 09:07, Juergen Schoenwaelder
> > wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 07:34:23AM +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> >> Andy Bierman wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 6:16 AM, Robert Varga wrote:
> >>>
> On 11 Nov 2015, at 09:07, Juergen Schoenwaelder
> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 07:34:23AM +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
>> Andy Bierman wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 6:16 AM, Robert Varga wrote:
>>>
Hello,
I am not favor of it, either, but RFC6020 is here and is
Martin Bjorklund writes:
> Andy Bierman wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 6:16 AM, Robert Varga wrote:
>>
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > I am not favor of it, either, but RFC6020 is here and is being widely
>> > deployed. So is RESTCONF+JSON, which is favored by application developers
>> > in the field
Robert Varga writes:
> On 11/05/2015 09:56 AM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>>> Given the resolution of Y34 in YANG 1.1, Martin's proposal to encode
>>> >anyxml as a string that has XML inside makes sense.
>> The possibility of sending arbitrary (non-YANG) data in the native encoding
>> can occassiona
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 07:34:23AM +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> Andy Bierman wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 6:16 AM, Robert Varga wrote:
> >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > I am not favor of it, either, but RFC6020 is here and is being widely
> > > deployed. So is RESTCONF+JSON, which is favore
Andy Bierman wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 6:16 AM, Robert Varga wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > I am not favor of it, either, but RFC6020 is here and is being widely
> > deployed. So is RESTCONF+JSON, which is favored by application developers
> > in the field today, as is NETCONF devices produc
On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 6:16 AM, Robert Varga wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am not favor of it, either, but RFC6020 is here and is being widely
> deployed. So is RESTCONF+JSON, which is favored by application developers
> in the field today, as is NETCONF devices producing anyxml. We do need a
> reasonab
Hello,
I am not favor of it, either, but RFC6020 is here and is being widely
deployed. So is RESTCONF+JSON, which is favored by application
developers in the field today, as is NETCONF devices producing anyxml.
We do need a reasonable way of bridging the two -- no matter whether it
is configu
Hi,
I am not in favor of anything XML or JSON specific in YANG.
In reality, nobody uses anyxml as a configuration data node,
so an improper roundtrip translation from JSON to XML
is not going to happen.
Encoding anyxml as a string is not going to happen either.
Not sure what the difference betwee
On 11/05/2015 09:56 AM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
Given the resolution of Y34 in YANG 1.1, Martin's proposal to encode
>anyxml as a string that has XML inside makes sense.
The possibility of sending arbitrary (non-YANG) data in the native encoding can
occassionally be useful, and even more so in J
> On 05 Nov 2015, at 15:51, Juergen Schoenwaelder
> wrote:
>
> Lada,
>
> this seems to be related to YANG 1.1 issue Y34 which we concluded with
> consensus on Y34-05, which extends Y34-02. And Y34-02 says:
>
> 'anyxml' would still be used to represent unrestricted XML, as is
> done in NETCO
Lada,
this seems to be related to YANG 1.1 issue Y34 which we concluded with
consensus on Y34-05, which extends Y34-02. And Y34-02 says:
'anyxml' would still be used to represent unrestricted XML, as is
done in NETCONF.
Your repeated attempts to generalize anyxml does not give us
interoperab
Hi,
at the NETMOD session Martin proposed that JSON encoding of anyxml instances be
changed so that it is required to contain a JSON string with well-formed XML
serialization inside. His argument was that "xml" is part on the data node name
and also that RFC 6020 says it is "an unknown chunk of
48 matches
Mail list logo
