From bclaise@cisco.com Fri May 4 10:28:01 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 346B521F85C3 for ; Fri, 4 May 2012 10:28:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -8.305 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.305 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.294, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yrWLiqOLFdtA for ; Fri, 4 May 2012 10:28:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from av-tac-sj.cisco.com (firebird.cisco.com [171.68.227.73]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B700821F85AC for ; Fri, 4 May 2012 10:28:00 -0700 (PDT) X-TACSUNS: Virus Scanned Received: from fire.cisco.com (localhost.cisco.com [127.0.0.1]) by av-tac-sj.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q44HS0Hd018817 for ; Fri, 4 May 2012 10:28:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.21.169.179] ([10.21.169.179]) by fire.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q44HRxfj000580 for ; Fri, 4 May 2012 10:27:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4FA4119F.1020002@cisco.com> Date: Fri, 04 May 2012 13:27:59 -0400 From: Benoit Claise User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120327 Thunderbird/11.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: NETMOD Working Group Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [netmod] draft-ietf-netmod-smi-yang-05 approved by the IESG X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 May 2012 17:28:01 -0000 Dear all, The IESG approved draft-ietf-netmod-smi-yang-05. Thanks to everybody who contributed and especially to Juergen. Regards, Benoit. From lhotka@nic.cz Mon May 7 02:59:17 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AFCF21F8595 for ; Mon, 7 May 2012 02:59:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.959 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.959 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.040, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_23=0.6] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2t-MPkOchxxK for ; Mon, 7 May 2012 02:59:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from trail.lhotka.name (trail.lhotka.name [77.48.224.143]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0215521F858F for ; Mon, 7 May 2012 02:59:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by trail.lhotka.name (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2334854037F; Mon, 7 May 2012 11:59:15 +0200 (CEST) Received: from trail.lhotka.name ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (trail.lhotka.name [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pavQqpOSM6n9; Mon, 7 May 2012 11:59:10 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (birdie.lhotkovi.cz [172.29.2.201]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by trail.lhotka.name (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0315C54029F; Mon, 7 May 2012 11:59:10 +0200 (CEST) From: Ladislav Lhotka To: Martin Bjorklund , netmod@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <20120430.123625.1495330351770276435.mbj@tail-f.com> References: <20120430.123625.1495330351770276435.mbj@tail-f.com> User-Agent: Notmuch/0.12+113~gde05574 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.3.50.1 (i386-apple-darwin9.8.0) Mail-Followup-To: Martin Bjorklund , netmod@ietf.org Date: Mon, 07 May 2012 11:59:11 +0200 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: [netmod] host routing X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 May 2012 09:59:17 -0000 Hi, the -03 version of ip-cfg refers in sec. 2 to the routing-cfg draft regarding configuration of IP routing. This means that any device that does IP routing (which is pretty much every device, not only routers) needs to implement the ip-routing module. Dave Thaler in his review of routing-cfg also points out that some of the concepts (routing table, active route) are necessary for hosts as well as for routers but the terminology in routing-cfg often seems to define the concepts only for routers. This leads me to the conclusion that the routing-cfg draft should use more generic terms in such cases. For instance, given the standard host/router/system terminology, already the top-level container should probably be "system" rather than "router". But that would be confusing because it really contains only routing parameters and we also have the "ietf-system" module. Any comments or ideas? Lada -- Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C From mbj@tail-f.com Tue May 8 05:20:40 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84A6521F8541 for ; Tue, 8 May 2012 05:20:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.839 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.839 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.207, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QLVU2KIXsYmS for ; Tue, 8 May 2012 05:20:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.tail-f.com (de-2007.d.ipeer.se [213.180.74.102]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBFDD21F84B6 for ; Tue, 8 May 2012 05:20:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (138.162.241.83.in-addr.dgcsystems.net [83.241.162.138]) by mail.tail-f.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E4F9D1200AC8; Tue, 8 May 2012 14:20:37 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 08 May 2012 14:20:37 +0200 (CEST) Message-Id: <20120508.142037.2021657873924626194.mbj@tail-f.com> To: lhotka@nic.cz From: Martin Bjorklund In-Reply-To: References: <20120430.123625.1495330351770276435.mbj@tail-f.com> X-Mailer: Mew version 6.4 on Emacs 23.3 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] host routing X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 May 2012 12:20:40 -0000 Hi, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > This leads me to the conclusion that the routing-cfg draft should use > more generic terms in such cases. For instance, given the standard > host/router/system terminology, already the top-level container should > probably be "system" rather than "router". The top-level container is currently called "routing", and that seems to me to be appropriate both for hosts and routers. The next level "list router" is maybe less obvious for a host, but I have already commented on that one ;-) /martin From lhotka@nic.cz Tue May 8 08:45:27 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD49D21F8653 for ; Tue, 8 May 2012 08:45:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.962 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.962 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.037, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_23=0.6] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kAMjzSnPcZCe for ; Tue, 8 May 2012 08:45:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.nic.cz (mail.nic.cz [IPv6:2001:1488:800:400::400]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3377421F8652 for ; Tue, 8 May 2012 08:45:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.29.2.202] (unknown [77.48.224.120]) by mail.nic.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EC1DA13F682; Tue, 8 May 2012 17:45:25 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nic.cz; s=default; t=1336491926; bh=qOOg/69uQrlwmj6RuWnKPxiCiajk2uBtnQWBduQOjnw=; h=Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To; b=IOMgjmIaLqt8Qbf4j3skcYPHPksvhUfc+2kmFgT9vjYTlxtz4UlF+j2LlH+rc4oh7 sgfzmXuyzS/RvHUyllO0mnWsSP0/Yz1s9TQtEGY5NyCZvPLZmJm2dKs7WgmMN1dzxl vGeVo0Uc9UiKgMy1iRNLuViez+qjoE4lciLrBe98= Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1257) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Ladislav Lhotka In-Reply-To: <20120508.142037.2021657873924626194.mbj@tail-f.com> Date: Tue, 8 May 2012 17:45:29 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <37F8037C-7836-42A6-893C-A1091D46B7CF@nic.cz> References: <20120430.123625.1495330351770276435.mbj@tail-f.com> <20120508.142037.2021657873924626194.mbj@tail-f.com> To: Martin Bjorklund X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1257) X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.96.5 at mail X-Virus-Status: Clean Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] host routing X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 May 2012 15:45:28 -0000 On May 8, 2012, at 2:20 PM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > Hi, >=20 > Ladislav Lhotka wrote: >> This leads me to the conclusion that the routing-cfg draft should use >> more generic terms in such cases. For instance, given the standard >> host/router/system terminology, already the top-level container = should >> probably be "system" rather than "router". >=20 > The top-level container is currently called "routing", and that seems > to me to be appropriate both for hosts and routers. >=20 > The next level "list router" is maybe less obvious for a host, but I > have already commented on that one ;-) Oh yes, I meant this one, and I do remember your comments. ;-) Apart = from finding a better name for the "router" list, I think two other = options were discussed: 1. Create some kind of top-level logical/virtual system, perhaps a la = SNMP context; 2. Duplicate the contents of the "router" list (with certain = modifications) outside of it, i.e., under "routing". =46rom these two, I'd prefer #1. Could it be implemented e.g. as an = optional NETCONF capability? Lada >=20 >=20 > /martin -- Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C From mbj@tail-f.com Wed May 9 10:37:21 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72F9821F8493 for ; Wed, 9 May 2012 10:37:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.907 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.907 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.139, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oeQ+LV1DSCJz for ; Wed, 9 May 2012 10:37:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.tail-f.com (de-2007.d.ipeer.se [213.180.74.102]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D413721F8442 for ; Wed, 9 May 2012 10:37:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (c213-100-166-57.cust.tele2.se [213.100.166.57]) by mail.tail-f.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 491E61200043; Wed, 9 May 2012 19:37:15 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 09 May 2012 19:37:14 +0200 (CEST) Message-Id: <20120509.193714.496048831.mbj@tail-f.com> To: lhotka@nic.cz From: Martin Bjorklund In-Reply-To: <37F8037C-7836-42A6-893C-A1091D46B7CF@nic.cz> References: <20120508.142037.2021657873924626194.mbj@tail-f.com> <37F8037C-7836-42A6-893C-A1091D46B7CF@nic.cz> X-Mailer: Mew version 6.3.51 on Emacs 23.3 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] host routing X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 May 2012 17:37:21 -0000 Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > > On May 8, 2012, at 2:20 PM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > >> This leads me to the conclusion that the routing-cfg draft should use > >> more generic terms in such cases. For instance, given the standard > >> host/router/system terminology, already the top-level container should > >> probably be "system" rather than "router". > > > > The top-level container is currently called "routing", and that seems > > to me to be appropriate both for hosts and routers. > > > > The next level "list router" is maybe less obvious for a host, but I > > have already commented on that one ;-) > > Oh yes, I meant this one, and I do remember your comments. ;-) Apart from > finding a better name for the "router" list, I think two other options were > discussed: > > 1. Create some kind of top-level logical/virtual system, perhaps a la SNMP > context; > > 2. Duplicate the contents of the "router" list (with certain modifications) > outside of it, i.e., under "routing". > > From these two, I'd prefer #1. Could it be implemented e.g. as an optional > NETCONF capability? Yes, see http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netmod/current/msg06568.html. But we don't have to solve that now. IMO, wrt the current data models, we should design them for one "system". If we somehow add system virtualization in the future, it would be an orthogonal thing, like what I outline in the msg cited above, which is not reflected in the data models. So I don't think your options above solve the same problem. The current question is "should the routing model support logical routers in the data model", and I beleive the answer on the ML is "yes". Then the next question is how we do this. Two alternatives have been mentioned: 1) a single "router" list - pro: simple - con: weird on systems that don't support logical routers, and hon simple hosts. 2) /routing/ logical-router/ (see http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netmod/current/msg06519.html) - pro: works well on systems w/o logical-routers - con: data-model duplication /martin From lhotka@nic.cz Wed May 9 12:34:41 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6716B21F84A5 for ; Wed, 9 May 2012 12:34:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.964 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.964 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.035, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_23=0.6] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tx+u2PcbKVbt for ; Wed, 9 May 2012 12:34:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.nic.cz (mail.nic.cz [IPv6:2001:1488:800:400::400]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 869CB21F8491 for ; Wed, 9 May 2012 12:34:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.29.2.202] (unknown [77.48.224.120]) by mail.nic.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3913513F69B; Wed, 9 May 2012 21:34:38 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nic.cz; s=default; t=1336592078; bh=0GFezrptXPofpz3V5UCeOMIe8jV5cujvzvk4nTPC2Vo=; h=Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To; b=Vci+fYt3w1ogGF6nwnSelAsUSsuUtCgnI96KgbiQ8Y5mDHOkyJrRM6cMdHrceelAs 5BWAFaOWlb1LjS50ORg/VodTGWzloIzdEYmIUMF1E5vB1G4krQ19fOPVFTwmio4JM9 TQ553ekTxU2QXVvoUggf0bIzyMrNfBczVIYt9fZQ= Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1257) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Ladislav Lhotka In-Reply-To: <20120509.193714.496048831.mbj@tail-f.com> Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 21:34:33 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <1E26963C-257F-4558-955D-17FA2BDFEC9F@nic.cz> References: <20120508.142037.2021657873924626194.mbj@tail-f.com> <37F8037C-7836-42A6-893C-A1091D46B7CF@nic.cz> <20120509.193714.496048831.mbj@tail-f.com> To: Martin Bjorklund X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1257) X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.96.5 at mail X-Virus-Status: Clean Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] host routing X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 May 2012 19:34:41 -0000 On May 9, 2012, at 7:37 PM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > Ladislav Lhotka wrote: >>=20 >> On May 8, 2012, at 2:20 PM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: >>=20 >>> Hi, >>>=20 >>> Ladislav Lhotka wrote: >>>> This leads me to the conclusion that the routing-cfg draft should = use >>>> more generic terms in such cases. For instance, given the standard >>>> host/router/system terminology, already the top-level container = should >>>> probably be "system" rather than "router". >>>=20 >>> The top-level container is currently called "routing", and that = seems >>> to me to be appropriate both for hosts and routers. >>>=20 >>> The next level "list router" is maybe less obvious for a host, but I >>> have already commented on that one ;-) >>=20 >> Oh yes, I meant this one, and I do remember your comments. ;-) Apart = from >> finding a better name for the "router" list, I think two other = options were >> discussed: >>=20 >> 1. Create some kind of top-level logical/virtual system, perhaps a la = SNMP >> context; >>=20 >> 2. Duplicate the contents of the "router" list (with certain = modifications) >> outside of it, i.e., under "routing". >>=20 >> =46rom these two, I'd prefer #1. Could it be implemented e.g. as an = optional >> NETCONF capability? >=20 > Yes, see > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netmod/current/msg06568.html. >=20 > But we don't have to solve that now. >=20 > IMO, wrt the current data models, we should design them for one > "system". If we somehow add system virtualization in the future, it > would be an orthogonal thing, like what I outline in the msg cited > above, which is not reflected in the data models. >=20 > So I don't think your options above solve the same problem. Certain use cases for logical routers could be handled via full system = virtualization but yes, a more light-weight mechanism for partly coupled = logical routers (e.g. for MPLS/BGP VPNs) is probably needed as well. =20 >=20 > The current question is "should the routing model support logical > routers in the data model", and I beleive the answer on the ML is > "yes". Indeed. >=20 > Then the next question is how we do this. Two alternatives have been > mentioned: >=20 > 1) a single "router" list > - pro: simple > - con: weird on systems that don't support logical routers, and > hon simple hosts. >=20 > 2) /routing/ > logical-router/ A variant of this would be to put host and router stuff in separate = modules. I proposed a possible organization earlier: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netmod/current/msg06114.html Lada >=20 > (see > = http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netmod/current/msg06519.html) >=20 > - pro: works well on systems w/o logical-routers > - con: data-model duplication >=20 >=20 > /martin >=20 >=20 -- Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C From lhotka@nic.cz Fri May 11 03:45:53 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 171B721F85E5 for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 03:45:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.966 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.966 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.033, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_23=0.6] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YGvly4eiIo72 for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 03:45:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.nic.cz (mail.nic.cz [IPv6:2001:1488:800:400::400]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6678C21F85E4 for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 03:45:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.29.2.201] (unknown [77.48.224.120]) by mail.nic.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 718E113F69B; Fri, 11 May 2012 12:45:46 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nic.cz; s=default; t=1336733146; bh=kraIRNO1SOVSn9ZCGBZ3u4C+CdbhHHcVvL0lQyYYS/I=; h=Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To; b=tiaV1FITOf0F/CFkQATP5enr0ips7IoYoQUS2Z6ALGgD+G2DwyYwvX1bZGAicE0ZB 3dhWFr35SwFCnJXbvvay5N8LcXlNB9dKGchwTWrud1blZKeWuYr9xlriVtkSIEVKtJ nqGJNbRTargivyQYSzdqPNkUU2LJwI01MX6NUX+s= Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1257) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Ladislav Lhotka In-Reply-To: <1E26963C-257F-4558-955D-17FA2BDFEC9F@nic.cz> Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 12:45:45 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <1E5D2267-5E3A-48F9-BD8D-06C7CFBBF1EC@nic.cz> References: <20120508.142037.2021657873924626194.mbj@tail-f.com> <37F8037C-7836-42A6-893C-A1091D46B7CF@nic.cz> <20120509.193714.496048831.mbj@tail-f.com> <1E26963C-257F-4558-955D-17FA2BDFEC9F@nic.cz> To: Martin Bjorklund X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1257) X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.96.5 at mail X-Virus-Status: Clean Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] host routing X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 10:45:53 -0000 On May 9, 2012, at 9:34 PM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > A variant of this would be to put host and router stuff in separate = modules. I proposed a possible organization earlier: So how about the following two modules: ------------------------------------------------------ module: ietf-host-routing +--rw routing +--rw ipv4 | +--ro routing-table | +--rw static-routes | +--rw route [seqno] | +--rw seqno uint32 | +-- ... +--rw ipv6 +--ro routing-table +--rw static-routes +--rw route [seqno] +--rw seqno uint32 +-- ... rpcs: +---x active-route =20 +--ro input =20 | +--ro destination-address? inet:ip-address +--ro output =20 +--ro route ------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------ module: ietf-router +--rw router [name] +--rw name string +--rw enabled? boolean +--rw interfaces ... +--rw routing-protocols ... +--rw route-filters ... +--rw routing-tables ... rpcs: +---x active-route =20 +--ro input =20 | +--ro router router-ref | +--ro destination-address +--ro output =20 +--ro route ------------------------------------------------------ The "host-routing" module provides very simple routing data for hosts = (only one routing table for IPv4 and one for IPv6) and its organization = is analogical to "ip-cfg". The "router" module would be only for routers and compared to the = current "routing" module the top-level "routing" container is removed, = otherwise everything remains essentially the same. In both cases, the "active-route" RPC simply queries the FIB, which = could be implemented as a forwarding table or a route cache. What do you folks think about this? Lada -- Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C From j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de Fri May 11 04:14:05 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A40D621F8628 for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 04:14:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.164 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.164 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.085, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FtQl+fZTO+Dj for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 04:14:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de (hermes.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.23]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF63221F85DB for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 04:14:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (demetrius2.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.47]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C82D20CD0; Fri, 11 May 2012 13:14:04 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at jacobs-university.de Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de ([212.201.44.23]) by localhost (demetrius2.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.32]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ejxp0gQuyPsY; Fri, 11 May 2012 13:14:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from elstar.local (elstar.jacobs.jacobs-university.de [10.50.231.133]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id A453420CC6; Fri, 11 May 2012 13:14:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: by elstar.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id B9E541F03993; Fri, 11 May 2012 13:14:04 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 13:14:03 +0200 From: Juergen Schoenwaelder To: Ladislav Lhotka Message-ID: <20120511111403.GA10499@elstar.local> Mail-Followup-To: Ladislav Lhotka , Martin Bjorklund , netmod@ietf.org References: <20120508.142037.2021657873924626194.mbj@tail-f.com> <37F8037C-7836-42A6-893C-A1091D46B7CF@nic.cz> <20120509.193714.496048831.mbj@tail-f.com> <1E26963C-257F-4558-955D-17FA2BDFEC9F@nic.cz> <1E5D2267-5E3A-48F9-BD8D-06C7CFBBF1EC@nic.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1E5D2267-5E3A-48F9-BD8D-06C7CFBBF1EC@nic.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] host routing X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: Juergen Schoenwaelder List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 11:14:05 -0000 On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 12:45:45PM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > > The "host-routing" module provides very simple routing data for hosts (only one routing table for IPv4 and one for IPv6) and its organization is analogical to "ip-cfg". > > The "router" module would be only for routers and compared to the current "routing" module the top-level "routing" container is removed, otherwise everything remains essentially the same. > > In both cases, the "active-route" RPC simply queries the FIB, which could be implemented as a forwarding table or a route cache. > > What do you folks think about this? Which problem does this solve? A generic Linux/BSD box does not know whether it is used as a host or router. So would generic stuff then not end up supporting both, potentially increasing costs? /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103 From lhotka@nic.cz Fri May 11 04:50:27 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 646A721F86B3 for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 04:50:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.968 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.968 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.031, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_23=0.6] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0Szqd2pbfhwi for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 04:50:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.nic.cz (mail.nic.cz [IPv6:2001:1488:800:400::400]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60DEB21F86B8 for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 04:50:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.29.2.202] (unknown [77.48.224.120]) by mail.nic.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 66FF613F629 for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 13:50:10 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nic.cz; s=default; t=1336737010; bh=rj/FAusj7rFgIoEev5WK8ROKTcZ7WudgzhosCrZfzRY=; h=Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To; b=myhROpvFM7vjtm+VaNppQBUffLHfM7tPfxBjBCNut3HwdlGkDCJHSnv2Cxp4pFOVk uMMsLsSNet/yGRtrhwSw0IEuLLbUn2RZI+bDNpdk81bgiNbwibQcum8o9UMIp94acU 7nxkFylkZYIu225avb6THMGg3Gvvc5d+g1LWhl68= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1257) From: Ladislav Lhotka In-Reply-To: <20120511111403.GA10499@elstar.local> Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 13:50:09 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <20120508.142037.2021657873924626194.mbj@tail-f.com> <37F8037C-7836-42A6-893C-A1091D46B7CF@nic.cz> <20120509.193714.496048831.mbj@tail-f.com> <1E26963C-257F-4558-955D-17FA2BDFEC9F@nic.cz> <1E5D2267-5E3A-48F9-BD8D-06C7CFBBF1EC@nic.cz> <20120511111403.GA10499@elstar.local> To: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1257) X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.96.5 at mail X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [netmod] host routing X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 11:50:27 -0000 On May 11, 2012, at 1:14 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 12:45:45PM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: >>=20 >> The "host-routing" module provides very simple routing data for hosts = (only one routing table for IPv4 and one for IPv6) and its organization = is analogical to "ip-cfg". >>=20 >> The "router" module would be only for routers and compared to the = current "routing" module the top-level "routing" container is removed, = otherwise everything remains essentially the same. >>=20 >> In both cases, the "active-route" RPC simply queries the FIB, which = could be implemented as a forwarding table or a route cache. >>=20 >> What do you folks think about this? >=20 > Which problem does this solve? A generic Linux/BSD box does not know > whether it is used as a host or router. So would generic stuff then > not end up supporting both, potentially increasing costs? What do you mean by "generic stuff"? Every implementation can and should = choose one of them, so a web camera would use "host-routing" while a box = running a routing daemon would use "router". Lada >=20 > /js >=20 > --=20 > Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH > Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany > Fax: +49 421 200 3103 -- Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C From j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de Fri May 11 05:08:52 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C0C921F85FD for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 05:08:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.165 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.165 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.084, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EVIWXWkgVSYg for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 05:08:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de (hermes.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.23]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C09F21F8603 for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 05:08:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (demetrius4.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.49]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7725820CD2; Fri, 11 May 2012 14:08:47 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at jacobs-university.de Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de ([212.201.44.23]) by localhost (demetrius4.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.32]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lOZ9pg73DwXf; Fri, 11 May 2012 14:08:47 +0200 (CEST) Received: from elstar.local (elstar.jacobs.jacobs-university.de [10.50.231.133]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA40820CD4; Fri, 11 May 2012 14:08:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: by elstar.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id 198021F0419E; Fri, 11 May 2012 14:08:46 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 14:08:46 +0200 From: Juergen Schoenwaelder To: Ladislav Lhotka Message-ID: <20120511120844.GB11092@elstar.local> Mail-Followup-To: Ladislav Lhotka , netmod@ietf.org References: <20120508.142037.2021657873924626194.mbj@tail-f.com> <37F8037C-7836-42A6-893C-A1091D46B7CF@nic.cz> <20120509.193714.496048831.mbj@tail-f.com> <1E26963C-257F-4558-955D-17FA2BDFEC9F@nic.cz> <1E5D2267-5E3A-48F9-BD8D-06C7CFBBF1EC@nic.cz> <20120511111403.GA10499@elstar.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] host routing X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: Juergen Schoenwaelder List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 12:08:52 -0000 On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 01:50:09PM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > > What do you mean by "generic stuff"? Every implementation can and > should choose one of them, so a web camera would use "host-routing" > while a box running a routing daemon would use "router". A web camera is pretty clearly not "generic stuff". But... - Is a Debian box a router? - Is a Debian box a router if it has routing software installed, even if it is not configured? - Is a Debian box a router if it has routing software enabled but not configured? - Is a Debian box which has routing enabled becoming a host if I shutdown the routing software? And what about different run levels? This gets me back to the question which problem we are solving (or whether we are creating one ;-). /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103 From lhotka@nic.cz Fri May 11 05:21:39 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFB9021F8621 for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 05:21:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.969 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.969 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.030, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_23=0.6] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ezT+uVbC5njK for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 05:21:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.nic.cz (mail.nic.cz [IPv6:2001:1488:800:400::400]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15F0721F84EA for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 05:21:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.29.2.202] (unknown [77.48.224.120]) by mail.nic.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EB1D413FA60; Fri, 11 May 2012 14:21:37 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nic.cz; s=default; t=1336738898; bh=UwQ2/9DyGnDPwkdLrhIOq6B2K9wRDamPD1D+iTI7EUI=; h=Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To; b=OR0D42auVm8KISFLnI1N6aBr+Uwd9piZOsBXiVkgyK6dNOjr//uNnSEFc/ZElvUeo lLlSaF8F3xGZAUbuEcfnAy/cGvFXSZR1aubydFvGTCd+DzTdBhihn/3/4xi3fOxfhG cnBrcogJ7MtixU/MmxSfrVStCHU9A3jFHNdMU/Rc= Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1257) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Ladislav Lhotka In-Reply-To: <20120511120844.GB11092@elstar.local> Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 14:21:33 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <20120508.142037.2021657873924626194.mbj@tail-f.com> <37F8037C-7836-42A6-893C-A1091D46B7CF@nic.cz> <20120509.193714.496048831.mbj@tail-f.com> <1E26963C-257F-4558-955D-17FA2BDFEC9F@nic.cz> <1E5D2267-5E3A-48F9-BD8D-06C7CFBBF1EC@nic.cz> <20120511111403.GA10499@elstar.local> <20120511120844.GB11092@elstar.local> To: Juergen Schoenwaelder X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1257) X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.96.5 at mail X-Virus-Status: Clean Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] host routing X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 12:21:39 -0000 On May 11, 2012, at 2:08 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 01:50:09PM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: >>=20 >> What do you mean by "generic stuff"? Every implementation can and >> should choose one of them, so a web camera would use "host-routing" >> while a box running a routing daemon would use "router". >=20 > A web camera is pretty clearly not "generic stuff". But... >=20 > - Is a Debian box a router? >=20 > - Is a Debian box a router if it has routing software installed, even > if it is not configured? >=20 > - Is a Debian box a router if it has routing software enabled but not > configured? >=20 > - Is a Debian box which has routing enabled becoming a host if I > shutdown the routing software? And what about different run levels? This all depends on the modules advertised by its NETCONF server. If the = box could potentially be used as a router, then the "router" module = should be used. >=20 > This gets me back to the question which problem we are solving (or > whether we are creating one ;-). The problem we are solving is that even simple hosts need some routing = configuration and data. Currently the only option is to use the = "routing" module (as the "ip-cfg" draft suggests), which is an overkill, = and also it is really weird for a host to have the "router" list in its = configuration even if it doesn't forward packets. Lada >=20 > /js >=20 > --=20 > Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH > Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany > Fax: +49 421 200 3103 -- Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C From j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de Fri May 11 05:30:38 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BED621F86B8 for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 05:30:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.166 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.166 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.083, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bqv4AL95lB5Q for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 05:30:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de (hermes.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.23]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7712B21F86B5 for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 05:30:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (demetrius3.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.48]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF85520C88; Fri, 11 May 2012 14:30:36 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at jacobs-university.de Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de ([212.201.44.23]) by localhost (demetrius3.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.32]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qZpqYpiszewt; Fri, 11 May 2012 14:30:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: from elstar.local (elstar.jacobs.jacobs-university.de [10.50.231.133]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 658B020C87; Fri, 11 May 2012 14:30:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: by elstar.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id 4BC311F04320; Fri, 11 May 2012 14:30:37 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 14:30:37 +0200 From: Juergen Schoenwaelder To: Ladislav Lhotka Message-ID: <20120511123037.GB11556@elstar.local> Mail-Followup-To: Ladislav Lhotka , netmod@ietf.org References: <20120508.142037.2021657873924626194.mbj@tail-f.com> <37F8037C-7836-42A6-893C-A1091D46B7CF@nic.cz> <20120509.193714.496048831.mbj@tail-f.com> <1E26963C-257F-4558-955D-17FA2BDFEC9F@nic.cz> <1E5D2267-5E3A-48F9-BD8D-06C7CFBBF1EC@nic.cz> <20120511111403.GA10499@elstar.local> <20120511120844.GB11092@elstar.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] host routing X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: Juergen Schoenwaelder List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 12:30:38 -0000 On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 02:21:33PM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > > The problem we are solving is that even simple hosts need some > routing configuration and data. Currently the only option is to use > the "routing" module (as the "ip-cfg" draft suggests), which is an > overkill, and also it is really weird for a host to have the > "router" list in its configuration even if it doesn't forward > packets. Can I find somewhere an example detailing what would be visible in the config of a host if we use the "routing" module (as the "ip-cfg" draft suggests)? /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103 From lhotka@nic.cz Fri May 11 06:08:00 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A210021F871E for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 06:08:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.971 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.971 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.028, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_23=0.6] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sRFE2Mu0eUkj for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 06:08:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.nic.cz (mail.nic.cz [IPv6:2001:1488:800:400::400]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C60D21F871A for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 06:07:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.29.2.202] (unknown [77.48.224.120]) by mail.nic.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 21D5E13FA60; Fri, 11 May 2012 15:07:58 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nic.cz; s=default; t=1336741678; bh=hTUN9wSDsu6WY1AlYfqP/MgeusmEb5ieFAkfRG7eq2w=; h=Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To; b=u6oKdahBnaYy0j3Or5rE6q/+7BRiUj7Yt8/U6nU9NKkQTgb46NlveL5A8Rts+OCRQ i2qEFHADpwxlXm2UjVGjGNVIjByTqn1AlFMzSSbhbHuupl/PmDxWAcD1Z0NpnWSpu/ rWonqtgkM9VY7mfNmDmnfdJeF/rAn8lfI/gCpuQQ= Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1257) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Ladislav Lhotka In-Reply-To: <20120511123037.GB11556@elstar.local> Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 15:07:53 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <23C5C65D-A931-409D-B6A6-F19BF5B411B1@nic.cz> References: <20120508.142037.2021657873924626194.mbj@tail-f.com> <37F8037C-7836-42A6-893C-A1091D46B7CF@nic.cz> <20120509.193714.496048831.mbj@tail-f.com> <1E26963C-257F-4558-955D-17FA2BDFEC9F@nic.cz> <1E5D2267-5E3A-48F9-BD8D-06C7CFBBF1EC@nic.cz> <20120511111403.GA10499@elstar.local> <20120511120844.GB11092@elstar.local> <20120511123037.GB11556@elstar.local> To: Juergen Schoenwaelder X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1257) X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.96.5 at mail X-Virus-Status: Clean Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] host routing X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 13:08:00 -0000 On May 11, 2012, at 2:30 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 02:21:33PM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: >>=20 >> The problem we are solving is that even simple hosts need some >> routing configuration and data. Currently the only option is to use >> the "routing" module (as the "ip-cfg" draft suggests), which is an >> overkill, and also it is really weird for a host to have the >> "router" list in its configuration even if it doesn't forward >> packets. >=20 > Can I find somewhere an example detailing what would be visible in the > config of a host if we use the "routing" module (as the "ip-cfg" draft > suggests)? A minimum configuration could be something like rtr0 eth0 direct direct st0 static 1 0.0.0.0/0 192.0.2.2 ipv4-unicast-main ipv4-unicast-main Using the proposed "host-routing" module, the same configuration would = be represented as 1 0.0.0.0/0 192.0.2.2 Lada >=20 > /js >=20 > --=20 > Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH > Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany > Fax: +49 421 200 3103 -- Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C From mbj@tail-f.com Mon May 14 03:10:21 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 436BD21F85ED for ; Mon, 14 May 2012 03:10:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.56 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.56 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.114, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, J_CHICKENPOX_44=0.6] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id h79Xzb6XiFlW for ; Mon, 14 May 2012 03:10:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.tail-f.com (de-2007.d.ipeer.se [213.180.74.102]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BDD121F85A2 for ; Mon, 14 May 2012 03:10:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (138.162.241.83.in-addr.dgcsystems.net [83.241.162.138]) by mail.tail-f.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5C0E112008BF for ; Mon, 14 May 2012 12:10:18 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 12:10:18 +0200 (CEST) Message-Id: <20120514.121018.1571888950609681642.mbj@tail-f.com> To: netmod@ietf.org From: Martin Bjorklund X-Mailer: Mew version 6.4 on Emacs 23.3 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [netmod] Issue in draft-ietf-netmod-smi-yang-05 X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 10:10:21 -0000 Hi, I just realized that the draft is a bit a unclear on one issue. It says: If an OCTET STRING type has an associated DISPLAY-HINT, then the corresponding YANG base type is the string type. So e.g. DateAndTime ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION DISPLAY-HINT "2d-1d-1d,1d:1d:1d.1d,1a1d:1d" ... SYNTAX OCTET STRING (SIZE (8 | 11)) becomes: typedef DateAndTime { ... type string; } (to make my point I didn't include the smiv2:display-hint stmt above). The draft doesn't say what the YANG-formatted value will be. Is an implementation allowed to format this date+time any way it wants (e.g. as a yang:date-and-time), or MUST it use the display hint? The intention is that it MUST use the display-hint. If possible (the document is in the RFC Ed. queue), I suggest we make this clarification: OLD: The mapping of the OCTET STRING depends on the context. If an OCTET STRING type has an associated DISPLAY-HINT, then the corresponding YANG base type is the string type. Otherwise, the binary type is used. NEW: The mapping of the OCTET STRING depends on the context. If an OCTET STRING type has an associated DISPLAY-HINT, then the corresponding YANG base type is the string type. An implementation MUST format an OCTET STRING value according to the DISPLAY-HINT, as described in RFC 2579. If an OCTECT STRING type does not have an associated DISPLAY-HINT, the binary type is used. /martin From j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de Mon May 14 03:31:36 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E08ED21F85DB for ; Mon, 14 May 2012 03:31:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.168 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.168 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.081, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FLkLEaseu6qM for ; Mon, 14 May 2012 03:31:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de (hermes.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.23]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 397ED21F85CF for ; Mon, 14 May 2012 03:31:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (demetrius2.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.47]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52E2820C04; Mon, 14 May 2012 12:31:33 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at jacobs-university.de Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de ([212.201.44.23]) by localhost (demetrius2.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.32]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ObpXxwr558jl; Mon, 14 May 2012 12:31:33 +0200 (CEST) Received: from elstar.local (elstar.jacobs.jacobs-university.de [10.50.231.133]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3B1B20BF7; Mon, 14 May 2012 12:31:32 +0200 (CEST) Received: by elstar.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id 7749A1F0C1CC; Mon, 14 May 2012 12:31:34 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 12:31:34 +0200 From: Juergen Schoenwaelder To: Martin Bjorklund , David Kessens Message-ID: <20120514103134.GA83053@elstar.local> Mail-Followup-To: Martin Bjorklund , David Kessens , netmod@ietf.org References: <20120514.121018.1571888950609681642.mbj@tail-f.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120514.121018.1571888950609681642.mbj@tail-f.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] Issue in draft-ietf-netmod-smi-yang-05 X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: Juergen Schoenwaelder List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 10:31:36 -0000 On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 12:10:18PM +0200, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > If possible (the document is in the RFC Ed. queue), I suggest we make > this clarification: > > OLD: > > The mapping of the > OCTET STRING depends on the context. If an OCTET STRING type has an > associated DISPLAY-HINT, then the corresponding YANG base type is the > string type. Otherwise, the binary type is used. > > NEW: > > The mapping of the > OCTET STRING depends on the context. If an OCTET STRING type has an > associated DISPLAY-HINT, then the corresponding YANG base type is the > string type. An implementation MUST format an OCTET STRING value > according to the DISPLAY-HINT, as described in RFC 2579. If an > OCTECT STRING type does not have an associated DISPLAY-HINT, the > binary type is used. The proposed change captures the intention that indeed is not well spelled out. Hence, from a technical point of view, I support this clarification. If the document shepherd (David Kessens) and the AD support doing this change during AUTH48, I am happy to implement this. I guess they like to see broad support, especially from the implementors. So please speak up. /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103 From bertietf@bwijnen.net Mon May 14 04:06:00 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 069C821F86BD for ; Mon, 14 May 2012 04:06:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4A15FjZu-E2E for ; Mon, 14 May 2012 04:05:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from postlady.ripe.net (postlady.ipv6.ripe.net [IPv6:2001:67c:2e8:11::c100:1341]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4207221F86BA for ; Mon, 14 May 2012 04:05:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dodo.ripe.net ([193.0.23.4]) by postlady.ripe.net with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1STt6C-0008GB-Eh; Mon, 14 May 2012 13:05:57 +0200 Received: from dog.ripe.net ([193.0.1.217] helo=guest111.guestnet.ripe.net) by dodo.ripe.net with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1STt6C-0001IY-6q; Mon, 14 May 2012 13:05:56 +0200 Message-ID: <4FB0E713.6050200@bwijnen.net> Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 13:05:55 +0200 From: "Bert Wijnen (IETF)" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Martin Bjorklund , David Kessens , netmod@ietf.org References: <20120514.121018.1571888950609681642.mbj@tail-f.com> <20120514103134.GA83053@elstar.local> In-Reply-To: <20120514103134.GA83053@elstar.local> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Anti-Virus: Kaspersky Anti-Virus for Linux Mail Server 5.6.48/RELEASE, bases: 20120425 #7816066, check: 20120514 clean X-RIPE-Spam-Level: -- X-RIPE-Spam-Report: Spam Total Points: -2.9 points pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- ------------------------------------ -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] X-RIPE-Signature: 86ab03e524994f79ca2c75a176445dd4e2037fa6dd61e28fafc482bb4ce9171a Subject: Re: [netmod] Issue in draft-ietf-netmod-smi-yang-05 X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 11:06:00 -0000 The clarification makes sense to me. Bert On 5/14/12 12:31 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 12:10:18PM +0200, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > >> If possible (the document is in the RFC Ed. queue), I suggest we make >> this clarification: >> >> OLD: >> >> The mapping of the >> OCTET STRING depends on the context. If an OCTET STRING type has an >> associated DISPLAY-HINT, then the corresponding YANG base type is the >> string type. Otherwise, the binary type is used. >> >> NEW: >> >> The mapping of the >> OCTET STRING depends on the context. If an OCTET STRING type has an >> associated DISPLAY-HINT, then the corresponding YANG base type is the >> string type. An implementation MUST format an OCTET STRING value >> according to the DISPLAY-HINT, as described in RFC 2579. If an >> OCTECT STRING type does not have an associated DISPLAY-HINT, the >> binary type is used. > > The proposed change captures the intention that indeed is not well > spelled out. Hence, from a technical point of view, I support this > clarification. If the document shepherd (David Kessens) and the AD > support doing this change during AUTH48, I am happy to implement this. > I guess they like to see broad support, especially from the > implementors. So please speak up. > > /js > From reid@snmp.com Mon May 14 06:26:15 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4320521F864B for ; Mon, 14 May 2012 06:26:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id E9jqURKEKoqH for ; Mon, 14 May 2012 06:26:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailbox.snmp.com (mailbox.snmp.com [192.147.142.80]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8676421F85A4 for ; Mon, 14 May 2012 06:26:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from adminfs.snmp.com (adminfs.snmp.com [192.147.142.39]) by mailbox.snmp.com (8.9.3p2-20030922/m.0080228) with ESMTP id JAA06807; Mon, 14 May 2012 09:26:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from snmp.com (LOCALHOST.snmp.com [127.0.0.1]) by adminfs.snmp.com (8.9.3p2-20030922/snmpclient.mc-990525) with ESMTP id JAA05611; Mon, 14 May 2012 09:25:58 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <201205141325.JAA05611@adminfs.snmp.com> To: "Bert Wijnen (IETF)" From: David Reid In-reply-to: Your message of Mon, 14 May 2012 13:05:55 +0200. <4FB0E713.6050200@bwijnen.net> Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 09:25:58 -0400 Sender: reid@snmp.com Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] Issue in draft-ietf-netmod-smi-yang-05 X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: David Reid List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 13:26:15 -0000 I agree with the proposed clarification. -David Reid > The clarification makes sense to me. > > Bert > > On 5/14/12 12:31 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > > On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 12:10:18PM +0200, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > > >> If possible (the document is in the RFC Ed. queue), I suggest we make > >> this clarification: > >> > >> OLD: > >> > >> The mapping of the > >> OCTET STRING depends on the context. If an OCTET STRING type has an > >> associated DISPLAY-HINT, then the corresponding YANG base type is the > >> string type. Otherwise, the binary type is used. > >> > >> NEW: > >> > >> The mapping of the > >> OCTET STRING depends on the context. If an OCTET STRING type has an > >> associated DISPLAY-HINT, then the corresponding YANG base type is the > >> string type. An implementation MUST format an OCTET STRING value > >> according to the DISPLAY-HINT, as described in RFC 2579. If an > >> OCTECT STRING type does not have an associated DISPLAY-HINT, the > >> binary type is used. > > > > The proposed change captures the intention that indeed is not well > > spelled out. Hence, from a technical point of view, I support this > > clarification. If the document shepherd (David Kessens) and the AD > > support doing this change during AUTH48, I am happy to implement this. > > I guess they like to see broad support, especially from the > > implementors. So please speak up. > > > > /js > > > _______________________________________________ > netmod mailing list > netmod@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod From j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de Mon May 14 09:09:20 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73DF021F881E for ; Mon, 14 May 2012 09:09:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.169 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.169 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.080, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lgVlHfc0pwda for ; Mon, 14 May 2012 09:09:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de (hermes.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.23]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22A9921F881F for ; Mon, 14 May 2012 09:09:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (demetrius2.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.47]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6464920C23; Mon, 14 May 2012 18:09:18 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at jacobs-university.de Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de ([212.201.44.23]) by localhost (demetrius2.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.32]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8btGUmpQ5a4p; Mon, 14 May 2012 18:09:18 +0200 (CEST) Received: from elstar.local (elstar.jacobs.jacobs-university.de [10.50.231.133]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9AA320BD9; Mon, 14 May 2012 18:09:17 +0200 (CEST) Received: by elstar.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id AD4761F0CABA; Mon, 14 May 2012 18:09:19 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 18:09:19 +0200 From: Juergen Schoenwaelder To: Ladislav Lhotka Message-ID: <20120514160919.GC83909@elstar.local> Mail-Followup-To: Ladislav Lhotka , netmod@ietf.org References: <37F8037C-7836-42A6-893C-A1091D46B7CF@nic.cz> <20120509.193714.496048831.mbj@tail-f.com> <1E26963C-257F-4558-955D-17FA2BDFEC9F@nic.cz> <1E5D2267-5E3A-48F9-BD8D-06C7CFBBF1EC@nic.cz> <20120511111403.GA10499@elstar.local> <20120511120844.GB11092@elstar.local> <20120511123037.GB11556@elstar.local> <23C5C65D-A931-409D-B6A6-F19BF5B411B1@nic.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <23C5C65D-A931-409D-B6A6-F19BF5B411B1@nic.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] host routing X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: Juergen Schoenwaelder List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 16:09:20 -0000 On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 03:07:53PM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > > On May 11, 2012, at 2:30 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > > > On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 02:21:33PM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > >> > >> The problem we are solving is that even simple hosts need some > >> routing configuration and data. Currently the only option is to use > >> the "routing" module (as the "ip-cfg" draft suggests), which is an > >> overkill, and also it is really weird for a host to have the > >> "router" list in its configuration even if it doesn't forward > >> packets. > > > > Can I find somewhere an example detailing what would be visible in the > > config of a host if we use the "routing" module (as the "ip-cfg" draft > > suggests)? > > A minimum configuration could be something like > > > > rtr0 > > > eth0 > > > > > direct > direct > > > st0 > static > > > > 1 > 0.0.0.0/0 > 192.0.2.2 > > > > > ipv4-unicast-main > > > > > > > ipv4-unicast-main > > > > > > Using the proposed "host-routing" module, the same configuration would be represented as > > > > > > 1 > 0.0.0.0/0 > 192.0.2.2 > > > > > > Lada Could be worse. ;-) It seems we face a reoccurring pattern here, namely how to make simple configs simple while allowing for more complex configs at the same time. We see this here and we have seen this in the context of SNMP configuration models (and we will see it in other spaces like NTP configs or resolver configs etc.). Has anybody some great ideas how to address such issues in general? /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103 From lhotka@nic.cz Tue May 15 02:33:46 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E67621F8920 for ; Tue, 15 May 2012 02:33:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.972 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.972 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.027, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_23=0.6] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id umRH6A2qRQqF for ; Tue, 15 May 2012 02:33:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.nic.cz (mail.nic.cz [IPv6:2001:1488:800:400::400]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B272B21F8915 for ; Tue, 15 May 2012 02:33:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.29.2.201] (unknown [77.48.224.120]) by mail.nic.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B94F113FA60; Tue, 15 May 2012 11:33:42 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nic.cz; s=default; t=1337074422; bh=JQkTacyzArZPtC8EdX46Lxt3xqv82B37eWK0ipWN4Nk=; h=Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To; b=nqZyiL+cjPS/UOd5YECmedIUE5skLODcQcK3D47dRVM9IFMd4Qs6AE5QuQCQXduMQ dtAzJ6eve12p23WFhrgUKOnsVYkEg/Ogpjx5IjK7PMv88XJzcpuBIKJQkyL4dk6tjZ xls88LON5GylvxQ4idQBfOOPBrrEjbgR11gANq44= Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1257) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Ladislav Lhotka In-Reply-To: <20120514160919.GC83909@elstar.local> Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 11:33:45 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <2C452009-60C9-499A-8D7A-215F9447AA84@nic.cz> References: <37F8037C-7836-42A6-893C-A1091D46B7CF@nic.cz> <20120509.193714.496048831.mbj@tail-f.com> <1E26963C-257F-4558-955D-17FA2BDFEC9F@nic.cz> <1E5D2267-5E3A-48F9-BD8D-06C7CFBBF1EC@nic.cz> <20120511111403.GA10499@elstar.local> <20120511120844.GB11092@elstar.local> <20120511123037.GB11556@elstar.local> <23C5C65D-A931-409D-B6A6-F19BF5B411B1@nic.cz> <20120514160919.GC83909@elstar.local> To: Juergen Schoenwaelder X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1257) X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.96.5 at mail X-Virus-Status: Clean Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] host routing X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 09:33:46 -0000 On May 14, 2012, at 6:09 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 03:07:53PM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: >>=20 >> On May 11, 2012, at 2:30 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: >>=20 >>> On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 02:21:33PM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: >>>>=20 >>>> The problem we are solving is that even simple hosts need some >>>> routing configuration and data. Currently the only option is to use >>>> the "routing" module (as the "ip-cfg" draft suggests), which is an >>>> overkill, and also it is really weird for a host to have the >>>> "router" list in its configuration even if it doesn't forward >>>> packets. >>>=20 >>> Can I find somewhere an example detailing what would be visible in = the >>> config of a host if we use the "routing" module (as the "ip-cfg" = draft >>> suggests)? >>=20 >> A minimum configuration could be something like >>=20 >> >> >> rtr0 >> >> >> eth0 >> >> >> >> >> direct >> direct >> >> >> st0 >> static >> >> >> >> 1 >> 0.0.0.0/0 >> 192.0.2.2 >> >> >> >> >> ipv4-unicast-main >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ipv4-unicast-main >> >> >> >> >>=20 >> Using the proposed "host-routing" module, the same configuration = would be represented as >>=20 >> >> >> >> >> 1 >> 0.0.0.0/0 >> 192.0.2.2 >> >> >> >> >>=20 >> Lada >=20 > Could be worse. ;-) Sure. >=20 > It seems we face a reoccurring pattern here, namely how to make simple > configs simple while allowing for more complex configs at the same > time. We see this here and we have seen this in the context of SNMP > configuration models (and we will see it in other spaces like NTP > configs or resolver configs etc.). Has anybody some great ideas how to > address such issues in general? In this case, the extra stuff results mainly from the fact that the = complex model allows for having multiple instances (a list) of certain = objects such as routing tables, protocols etc., whilst the simple model = only needs one. It would help if YANG could specify default contents beyond leaf values, = and in particular default (or even fixed) entries of lists. Here it = could be e.g. the mandatory main "routing-table".=20 Lada >=20 > /js >=20 > --=20 > Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH > Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany > Fax: +49 421 200 3103 -- Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C From Jonathan.Hansford@generaldynamics.uk.com Tue May 15 03:39:41 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFF1921F8874 for ; Tue, 15 May 2012 03:39:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.743 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.743 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.605, BAYES_20=-0.74, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_21=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GL8veSzCvB6E for ; Tue, 15 May 2012 03:39:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail1.bemta5.messagelabs.com (mail1.bemta5.messagelabs.com [195.245.231.130]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A13321F8870 for ; Tue, 15 May 2012 03:39:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [85.158.139.3:48427] by server-3.bemta-5.messagelabs.com id 20/33-25237-36232BF4; Tue, 15 May 2012 10:39:31 +0000 X-Env-Sender: Jonathan.Hansford@generaldynamics.uk.com X-Msg-Ref: server-15.tower-90.messagelabs.com!1337078371!23797827!1 X-Originating-IP: [217.33.196.17] X-StarScan-Version: 6.5.10; banners=-,-,- X-VirusChecked: Checked Received: (qmail 23888 invoked from network); 15 May 2012 10:39:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.generaldynamics.uk.com) (217.33.196.17) by server-15.tower-90.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 15 May 2012 10:39:31 -0000 Received: from mail.compd.com (HELO gdukadh864.uk1.r-org.net) ([172.16.40.142]) by mail.generaldynamics.uk.com with ESMTP; 15 May 2012 11:39:23 +0100 Received: from GDUKADH850.uk1.r-org.net ([172.16.40.138]) by gdukadh864.uk1.r-org.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Tue, 15 May 2012 11:39:27 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01CD3287.0306B409" Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 11:39:30 +0100 Message-ID: <83C941F7F59F3F42AC017AD1E650546206B15A6C@GDUKADH850.uk1.r-org.net> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: RFC6087 - issue with YANG Module Template in Appendix B (pdf version) Thread-Index: Ac0yhwIR/7USkIdNTi++tJCYpyaT9g== From: To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 May 2012 10:39:27.0201 (UTC) FILETIME=[00620510:01CD3287] Subject: [netmod] RFC6087 - issue with YANG Module Template in Appendix B (pdf version) X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 10:39:42 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01CD3287.0306B409 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-NAIMIME-Disclaimer: 1 X-NAIMIME-Modified: 1 Hi, =20 Just extracted the YANG Module Template from Appendix B of the pdf version of RFC6087 and discovered it contains some non-UTF-8 characters. The apostrophe character (0x27) has been replaced with the Unicode character for a right single quotation mark (0x2019). That is not the case with the plain text of html versions. Is this a known problem with the pdf version of RFCs? =20 Jonathan Hansford=20 =20 This email and any files attached are intended for the addressee and may = contain information of a confidential nature. If you are not the intended= recipient, be aware that this email was sent to you in error and you sho= uld not disclose, distribute, print, copy or make other use of this email= or its attachments. Such actions, in fact, may be unlawful. In complianc= e with the various Regulations and Acts, General Dynamics United Kingdom = Limited reserves the right to monitor (and examine for viruses) all email= s and email attachments, both inbound and outbound. Email communications = and their attachments may not be secure or error- or virus-free and the c= ompany does not accept liability or responsibility for such matters or th= e consequences thereof. General Dynamics United Kingdom Limited, Register= ed Office: 21 Holborn Viaduct, London EC1A 2DY. Registered in England and= Wales No: 1911653.=20 ------_=_NextPart_001_01CD3287.0306B409 Content-Type: text/HTML; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-NAIMIME-Disclaimer: 1 X-NAIMIME-Modified: 1

Hi,

 

Just extracted the YANG Module Template from Appendix B of the pdf version of RFC6087 and discovered it contains some non-UTF-8 characters. The apostrophe character (0x27) has been replaced with the Unicode character for a right single quotation mark (0x2019). That is not the case with the plain text of html versions. Is this a known problem with the pdf version of RFCs?

 

Jonathan Hansford

 

This email and any files attached are intended for the addressee and may contain information of a confidential nature. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that this email was sent to you in error and you should not disclose, distribute, print, copy or make other use of this email or its attachments. Such actions, in fact, may be unlawful. In compliance with the various Regulations and Acts, General Dynamics United Kingdom Limited reserves the right to monitor (and examine for viruses) all emails and email attachments, both inbound and outbound. Email communications and their attachments may not be secure or error- or virus-free and the company does not accept liability or responsibility for such matters or the consequences thereof. General Dynamics United Kingdom Limited, Registered Office: 21 Holborn Viaduct, London EC1A 2DY. Registered in England and Wales No: 1911653.

------_=_NextPart_001_01CD3287.0306B409-- From j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de Tue May 15 04:07:26 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 856BE21F84D5 for ; Tue, 15 May 2012 04:07:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.17 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.17 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.079, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SMTllH-I0hRC for ; Tue, 15 May 2012 04:07:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de (hermes.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.23]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54AC621F847A for ; Tue, 15 May 2012 04:07:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (demetrius3.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.48]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FC3620C35; Tue, 15 May 2012 13:07:22 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at jacobs-university.de Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de ([212.201.44.23]) by localhost (demetrius3.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.32]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tCxZYwy4me1G; Tue, 15 May 2012 13:07:22 +0200 (CEST) Received: from elstar.local (elstar.jacobs.jacobs-university.de [10.50.231.133]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DC2120C33; Tue, 15 May 2012 13:07:22 +0200 (CEST) Received: by elstar.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id 034801F13B56; Tue, 15 May 2012 13:07:20 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 13:07:20 +0200 From: Juergen Schoenwaelder To: Jonathan.Hansford@generaldynamics.uk.com Message-ID: <20120515110720.GA692@elstar.local> Mail-Followup-To: Jonathan.Hansford@generaldynamics.uk.com, netmod@ietf.org References: <83C941F7F59F3F42AC017AD1E650546206B15A6C@GDUKADH850.uk1.r-org.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <83C941F7F59F3F42AC017AD1E650546206B15A6C@GDUKADH850.uk1.r-org.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] RFC6087 - issue with YANG Module Template in Appendix B (pdf version) X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: Juergen Schoenwaelder List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 11:07:26 -0000 On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 11:39:30AM +0100, Jonathan.Hansford@generaldynamics.uk.com wrote: > Hi, > > Just extracted the YANG Module Template from Appendix B of the pdf > version of RFC6087 and discovered it contains some non-UTF-8 characters. > The apostrophe character (0x27) has been replaced with the Unicode > character for a right single quotation mark (0x2019). That is not the > case with the plain text of html versions. Is this a known problem with > the pdf version of RFCs? Hi, I can't answer your question but please note that the .txt version is the authoritative version and hence my recommendation is to always extract material from the .txt versions. /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103 From Jonathan.Hansford@generaldynamics.uk.com Thu May 17 09:15:43 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B56EF21F8650 for ; Thu, 17 May 2012 09:15:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.345 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.345 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.761, BAYES_40=-0.185, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_21=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HJCzO8PXUMrd for ; Thu, 17 May 2012 09:15:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail1.bemta3.messagelabs.com (mail1.bemta3.messagelabs.com [195.245.230.34]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D205B21F862B for ; Thu, 17 May 2012 09:15:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [85.158.137.35:12044] by server-2.bemta-3.messagelabs.com id 33/83-09269-C2425BF4; Thu, 17 May 2012 16:15:40 +0000 X-Env-Sender: Jonathan.Hansford@generaldynamics.uk.com X-Msg-Ref: server-6.tower-134.messagelabs.com!1337271339!26028528!1 X-Originating-IP: [217.33.196.17] X-StarScan-Version: 6.5.10; banners=-,-,- X-VirusChecked: Checked Received: (qmail 23966 invoked from network); 17 May 2012 16:15:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.generaldynamics.uk.com) (217.33.196.17) by server-6.tower-134.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 17 May 2012 16:15:39 -0000 Received: from mail.generaldynamics.uk.com (HELO gdukadh864.uk1.r-org.net) ([172.16.40.142]) by mail.generaldynamics.uk.com with ESMTP; 17 May 2012 17:15:39 +0100 Received: from GDUKADH850.uk1.r-org.net ([172.16.40.138]) by gdukadh864.uk1.r-org.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 17 May 2012 17:15:38 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01CD3448.4B4D5CBE" Date: Thu, 17 May 2012 17:15:39 +0100 Message-ID: <83C941F7F59F3F42AC017AD1E650546206B16120@GDUKADH850.uk1.r-org.net> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: draft-bjorklund-netmod-snmp-cfg-02 Thread-Index: Ac00SEyqW0Z2RbG9T8K6X8kigR323A== From: To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 May 2012 16:15:38.0035 (UTC) FILETIME=[4BF68830:01CD3448] Subject: [netmod] draft-bjorklund-netmod-snmp-cfg-02 X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 May 2012 16:15:43 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01CD3448.4B4D5CBE Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-NAIMIME-Disclaimer: 1 X-NAIMIME-Modified: 1 Hi, =20 Using SegueSoft's MasterYANG, I'm getting an error when opening ietf-snmp-tls.yang but it goes away if I include ietf-snmp-engine.yang. Is that a problem with the submodule, the application or just one of those things that can happen with submodules? =20 Thanks, =20 Jonathan Hansford=20 =20 This email and any files attached are intended for the addressee and may = contain information of a confidential nature. If you are not the intended= recipient, be aware that this email was sent to you in error and you sho= uld not disclose, distribute, print, copy or make other use of this email= or its attachments. Such actions, in fact, may be unlawful. In complianc= e with the various Regulations and Acts, General Dynamics United Kingdom = Limited reserves the right to monitor (and examine for viruses) all email= s and email attachments, both inbound and outbound. Email communications = and their attachments may not be secure or error- or virus-free and the c= ompany does not accept liability or responsibility for such matters or th= e consequences thereof. General Dynamics United Kingdom Limited, Register= ed Office: 21 Holborn Viaduct, London EC1A 2DY. Registered in England and= Wales No: 1911653.=20 ------_=_NextPart_001_01CD3448.4B4D5CBE Content-Type: text/HTML; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-NAIMIME-Disclaimer: 1 X-NAIMIME-Modified: 1

Hi,

 

Using SegueSoft’s MasterYANG, I’m getting an error when opening ietf-snmp-tls.yang but it goes away if I include ietf-snmp-engine.yang. Is that a problem with the submodule, the application or just one of those things that can happen with submodules?

 

Thanks,

 

Jonathan Hansford

 

This email and any files attached are intended for the addressee and may contain information of a confidential nature. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that this email was sent to you in error and you should not disclose, distribute, print, copy or make other use of this email or its attachments. Such actions, in fact, may be unlawful. In compliance with the various Regulations and Acts, General Dynamics United Kingdom Limited reserves the right to monitor (and examine for viruses) all emails and email attachments, both inbound and outbound. Email communications and their attachments may not be secure or error- or virus-free and the company does not accept liability or responsibility for such matters or the consequences thereof. General Dynamics United Kingdom Limited, Registered Office: 21 Holborn Viaduct, London EC1A 2DY. Registered in England and Wales No: 1911653.

------_=_NextPart_001_01CD3448.4B4D5CBE-- From j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de Fri May 18 01:17:50 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68FFF21F85F8 for ; Fri, 18 May 2012 01:17:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.942 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.942 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.152, BAYES_20=-0.74, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kEGh6zwwX5F0 for ; Fri, 18 May 2012 01:17:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de (hermes.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.23]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C483721F854E for ; Fri, 18 May 2012 01:17:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (demetrius2.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.47]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE26E20C73; Fri, 18 May 2012 10:17:47 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at jacobs-university.de Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de ([212.201.44.23]) by localhost (demetrius2.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.32]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5uwGo01xx7KM; Fri, 18 May 2012 10:17:47 +0200 (CEST) Received: from elstar.local (elstar.jacobs.jacobs-university.de [10.50.231.133]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3815F20C61; Fri, 18 May 2012 10:17:47 +0200 (CEST) Received: by elstar.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id EB2811F1968E; Fri, 18 May 2012 10:17:45 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 10:17:45 +0200 From: Juergen Schoenwaelder To: netmod@ietf.org Message-ID: <20120518081745.GA20941@elstar.local> Mail-Followup-To: netmod@ietf.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Subject: [netmod] wg meeting at the summer ietf in vancouver X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: Juergen Schoenwaelder List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 08:17:51 -0000 Hi, I am about to request a WG meeting in Vancouver. I think 1.5 hours is sufficient, perhaps even just 1 hour (since most chartered documents are rather stable at this point in time). In the past, we had a rather long conflict list (WG sessions that should not overlap with the NETMOD meeting). I like to cut this down. Here is a first proposal: 1st priority: netconf opsarea opsawg 2nd priority: eman ipfix v6ops 6man softwire roll 3rd priority: sunset4 Please let me know soon if anything should be added (and why). /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103 From mbj@tail-f.com Sat May 19 13:08:15 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0ABFB9E8032 for ; Sat, 19 May 2012 13:08:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.046 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.046 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bVFZT0m8fGNc for ; Sat, 19 May 2012 13:08:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.tail-f.com (de-2007.d.ipeer.se [213.180.74.102]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 059B69E802E for ; Sat, 19 May 2012 13:08:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (78-70-160-207-no181.tbcn.telia.com [78.70.160.207]) by mail.tail-f.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EEC561200CB1; Sat, 19 May 2012 22:08:10 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sat, 19 May 2012 22:08:10 +0200 (CEST) Message-Id: <20120519.220810.359113674.mbj@tail-f.com> To: Jonathan.Hansford@generaldynamics.uk.com From: Martin Bjorklund In-Reply-To: <83C941F7F59F3F42AC017AD1E650546206B16120@GDUKADH850.uk1.r-org.net> References: <83C941F7F59F3F42AC017AD1E650546206B16120@GDUKADH850.uk1.r-org.net> X-Mailer: Mew version 6.3.51 on Emacs 23.3 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] draft-bjorklund-netmod-snmp-cfg-02 X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 19 May 2012 20:08:15 -0000 Hi, wrote: > Using SegueSoft's MasterYANG, I'm getting an error when opening > ietf-snmp-tls.yang but it goes away if I include ietf-snmp-engine.yang. > Is that a problem with the submodule, the application or just one of > those things that can happen with submodules? No it is a problem with the submodule. It needs to include ietf-snmp-engine. Now fixed, thanks! pyang gives the same error if invoked with ietf-snmp-tls.yang, but not when invoked with ietf-snmp.yang. I need to fix that... /martin From Jonathan.Hansford@generaldynamics.uk.com Mon May 21 07:51:25 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6882921F85F0 for ; Mon, 21 May 2012 07:51:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.397 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.397 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_21=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id etAdR5VmAMge for ; Mon, 21 May 2012 07:51:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail1.bemta14.messagelabs.com (mail1.bemta14.messagelabs.com [193.109.254.98]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D7AD21F85B8 for ; Mon, 21 May 2012 07:51:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [194.106.220.35:60659] by server-10.bemta-14.messagelabs.com id F0/EE-05847-B665ABF4; Mon, 21 May 2012 14:51:23 +0000 X-Env-Sender: Jonathan.Hansford@generaldynamics.uk.com X-Msg-Ref: server-15.tower-91.messagelabs.com!1337611881!11218896!1 X-Originating-IP: [217.33.196.17] X-StarScan-Version: 6.5.10; banners=-,-,- X-VirusChecked: Checked Received: (qmail 22470 invoked from network); 21 May 2012 14:51:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.generaldynamics.uk.com) (217.33.196.17) by server-15.tower-91.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 21 May 2012 14:51:21 -0000 Received: from mail.compd.com (HELO gdukadh864.uk1.r-org.net) ([172.16.40.142]) by mail.generaldynamics.uk.com with ESMTP; 21 May 2012 15:51:20 +0100 Received: from GDUKADH850.uk1.r-org.net ([172.16.40.138]) by gdukadh864.uk1.r-org.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Mon, 21 May 2012 15:51:21 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01CD3761.2EF9024C" Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 15:51:19 +0100 Message-ID: <83C941F7F59F3F42AC017AD1E650546206B8228A@GDUKADH850.uk1.r-org.net> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Structure of data models Thread-Index: Ac03YS45X/ISG0OBR+etaraOD+VXXw== From: To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 May 2012 14:51:21.0941 (UTC) FILETIME=[2FF2D050:01CD3761] Subject: [netmod] Structure of data models X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 14:51:25 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01CD3761.2EF9024C Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-NAIMIME-Disclaimer: 1 X-NAIMIME-Modified: 1 Hi, =20 As a newcomer to writing and implementing YANG modules, I have a general question. I am trying to create a data model for radios. Should the radio data model comprise a set of independent top-level modules that address different aspects of radio configuration (system management, routing, airside interface, etc.), or should there be one top-level module that imports and includes modules and submodules? And if it is personal preference, is there at least a strong steer one way or the other? =20 Thanks, =20 Jonathan Hansford=20 =20 This email and any files attached are intended for the addressee and may = contain information of a confidential nature. If you are not the intended= recipient, be aware that this email was sent to you in error and you sho= uld not disclose, distribute, print, copy or make other use of this email= or its attachments. Such actions, in fact, may be unlawful. In complianc= e with the various Regulations and Acts, General Dynamics United Kingdom = Limited reserves the right to monitor (and examine for viruses) all email= s and email attachments, both inbound and outbound. Email communications = and their attachments may not be secure or error- or virus-free and the c= ompany does not accept liability or responsibility for such matters or th= e consequences thereof. General Dynamics United Kingdom Limited, Register= ed Office: 21 Holborn Viaduct, London EC1A 2DY. Registered in England and= Wales No: 1911653.=20 ------_=_NextPart_001_01CD3761.2EF9024C Content-Type: text/HTML; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-NAIMIME-Disclaimer: 1 X-NAIMIME-Modified: 1

Hi,

 

As a newcomer to writing and implementing YANG modules, I have a general question. I am trying to create a data model for radios. Should the radio data model comprise a set of independent top-level modules that address different aspects of radio configuration (system management, routing, airside interface, etc.), or should there be one top-level module that imports and includes modules and submodules? And if it is personal preference, is there at least a strong steer one way or the other?

 

Thanks,

 

Jonathan Hansford

 

This email and any files attached are intended for the addressee and may contain information of a confidential nature. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that this email was sent to you in error and you should not disclose, distribute, print, copy or make other use of this email or its attachments. Such actions, in fact, may be unlawful. In compliance with the various Regulations and Acts, General Dynamics United Kingdom Limited reserves the right to monitor (and examine for viruses) all emails and email attachments, both inbound and outbound. Email communications and their attachments may not be secure or error- or virus-free and the company does not accept liability or responsibility for such matters or the consequences thereof. General Dynamics United Kingdom Limited, Registered Office: 21 Holborn Viaduct, London EC1A 2DY. Registered in England and Wales No: 1911653.

------_=_NextPart_001_01CD3761.2EF9024C-- From lhotka@nic.cz Mon May 21 08:07:20 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA05021F8674 for ; Mon, 21 May 2012 08:07:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_23=0.6] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qOUAecZlHAj8 for ; Mon, 21 May 2012 08:07:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.nic.cz (mail.nic.cz [IPv6:2001:1488:800:400::400]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41A9121F8673 for ; Mon, 21 May 2012 08:07:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.29.2.201] (unknown [77.48.224.120]) by mail.nic.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A34FC13F9D4; Mon, 21 May 2012 17:07:18 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nic.cz; s=default; t=1337612838; bh=g0XemvpFua0hlud9h32zpYdg73+UhsX1C004oZUGwy8=; h=Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To; b=sJiLDzpxRkxPS8x2smPFgr6zcrHO61hE5BnmvxFs4s8wQB4EkB3tbYAMVooq+AQsX fg8+CI6rndDKHZ+vIbM+023YV5MfufnvB71XeMWh3MONC96hu9iSiiesYW1HegspLM jG2BCfwVkeeJqt+wKGzwzYX1FABVRsNQjG9RVyUQ= Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1257) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Ladislav Lhotka In-Reply-To: <83C941F7F59F3F42AC017AD1E650546206B8228A@GDUKADH850.uk1.r-org.net> Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 17:07:13 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <4C07D73A-6AA7-412D-B768-D5A736A7EB15@nic.cz> References: <83C941F7F59F3F42AC017AD1E650546206B8228A@GDUKADH850.uk1.r-org.net> To: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1257) X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.96.5 at mail X-Virus-Status: Clean Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] Structure of data models X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 15:07:21 -0000 Hi, On May 21, 2012, at 4:51 PM, = wrote: > As a newcomer to writing and implementing YANG modules, I have a = general question. I am trying to create a data model for radios. Should = the radio data model comprise a set of independent top-level modules = that address different aspects of radio configuration (system = management, routing, airside interface, etc.), or should there be one = top-level module that imports and includes modules and submodules? And = if it is personal preference, is there at least a strong steer one way = or the other? Both are possible although the first option (multiple top-level modules) = is simpler and the existing NETMOD modules use it. Lada -- Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C From j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de Mon May 21 09:49:48 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22E3B21F8443 for ; Mon, 21 May 2012 09:49:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.249 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wV4pihjpxEpj for ; Mon, 21 May 2012 09:49:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de (hermes.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.23]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DCCE21F843F for ; Mon, 21 May 2012 09:49:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (demetrius1.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.46]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DAFB20BF0; Mon, 21 May 2012 18:49:46 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at jacobs-university.de Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de ([212.201.44.23]) by localhost (demetrius1.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.32]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id v8oZDlsy4XOf; Mon, 21 May 2012 18:49:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: from elstar.local (elstar.jacobs.jacobs-university.de [10.50.231.133]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE04920BED; Mon, 21 May 2012 18:49:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: by elstar.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id 43AC71F1D8A0; Mon, 21 May 2012 18:49:45 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 18:49:45 +0200 From: Juergen Schoenwaelder To: Ladislav Lhotka Message-ID: <20120521164945.GB1986@elstar.local> Mail-Followup-To: Ladislav Lhotka , Jonathan.Hansford@generaldynamics.uk.com, netmod@ietf.org References: <83C941F7F59F3F42AC017AD1E650546206B8228A@GDUKADH850.uk1.r-org.net> <4C07D73A-6AA7-412D-B768-D5A736A7EB15@nic.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4C07D73A-6AA7-412D-B768-D5A736A7EB15@nic.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: Jonathan.Hansford@generaldynamics.uk.com, netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] Structure of data models X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: Juergen Schoenwaelder List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 16:49:48 -0000 On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 05:07:13PM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > Hi, > > On May 21, 2012, at 4:51 PM, wrote: > > > As a newcomer to writing and implementing YANG modules, I have a general question. I am trying to create a data model for radios. Should the radio data model comprise a set of independent top-level modules that address different aspects of radio configuration (system management, routing, airside interface, etc.), or should there be one top-level module that imports and includes modules and submodules? And if it is personal preference, is there at least a strong steer one way or the other? > > Both are possible although the first option (multiple top-level modules) is simpler and the existing NETMOD modules use it. > Simpler tends to be subjective. ;-) What we need is a simple to understand list of technical trade-off so that people can determine for themself what is best concerning their requirements. Using submodules for instance makes related stuff live in one namespace, using multiple modules requires to deal with a different namespace for each module. Using one gigantic module might make change management complicated (but that again depends how stuff is 'published'). In other words, we would need a list of criteria and then people have something to work through in order to make their own informed decision. /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103 From mbj@tail-f.com Mon May 21 13:46:22 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DFE321F854E for ; Mon, 21 May 2012 13:46:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.046 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.046 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4Dm5Y2aTzdKt for ; Mon, 21 May 2012 13:46:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.tail-f.com (de-2007.d.ipeer.se [213.180.74.102]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A15921F8526 for ; Mon, 21 May 2012 13:46:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (c213-100-166-57.cust.tele2.se [213.100.166.57]) by mail.tail-f.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1486F1200AD8; Mon, 21 May 2012 22:46:20 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 22:46:19 +0200 (CEST) Message-Id: <20120521.224619.428583399.mbj@tail-f.com> To: j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de From: Martin Bjorklund In-Reply-To: <20120521164945.GB1986@elstar.local> References: <83C941F7F59F3F42AC017AD1E650546206B8228A@GDUKADH850.uk1.r-org.net> <4C07D73A-6AA7-412D-B768-D5A736A7EB15@nic.cz> <20120521164945.GB1986@elstar.local> X-Mailer: Mew version 6.4 on Emacs 23.3 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Jonathan.Hansford@generaldynamics.uk.com, netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] Structure of data models X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 20:46:22 -0000 Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 05:07:13PM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On May 21, 2012, at 4:51 PM, > > wrote: > > > > > As a newcomer to writing and implementing YANG modules, I have a general > > > question. I am trying to create a data model for radios. Should the radio > > > data model comprise a set of independent top-level modules that address > > > different aspects of radio configuration (system management, routing, > > > airside interface, etc.), or should there be one top-level module that > > > imports and includes modules and submodules? And if it is personal > > > preference, is there at least a strong steer one way or the other? > > > > Both are possible although the first option (multiple top-level modules) is > > simpler and the existing NETMOD modules use it. > > > > Simpler tends to be subjective. ;-) What we need is a simple to > understand list of technical trade-off so that people can determine > for themself what is best concerning their requirements. Using > submodules for instance makes related stuff live in one namespace, > using multiple modules requires to deal with a different namespace for > each module. Using one gigantic module might make change management > complicated (but that again depends how stuff is 'published'). In > other words, we would need a list of criteria and then people have > something to work through in order to make their own informed > decision. Another thing to think about is if existing generic data models can be used. I do not know enough about this radio config to know if it makes sense to use the ietf-interface model for the "airside interfaces", or if the ietf-routing framework could be used for this routing. /martin From lhotka@nic.cz Tue May 22 01:38:21 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F15421F85A5 for ; Tue, 22 May 2012 01:38:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_23=0.6] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uKeED29fGC0i for ; Tue, 22 May 2012 01:38:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.nic.cz (mail.nic.cz [IPv6:2001:1488:800:400::400]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA73321F8549 for ; Tue, 22 May 2012 01:38:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.29.2.202] (unknown [77.48.224.120]) by mail.nic.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 874F4141234; Tue, 22 May 2012 10:38:19 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nic.cz; s=default; t=1337675899; bh=RHn34mxgtxaWjgvCGy7elOTPFVuG4ePcknltVw38YTw=; h=Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To; b=QYaMTpOVe5+NmWy1vnEiKTjhgSsJ2vl8REzubuFubCI5vIX5YTzvAoZ7B+/pjI5rL gymowfpeyyHYIdlEvtdDZap9RxGG9qIOYmdU/nSmb+zvWHzKKPU9U/SRyZVI/Rnkev 7VRTL6IQKL0oni3DCqIkQRQwrAQgSGUVV0yE3rp8= Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1257) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Ladislav Lhotka In-Reply-To: <83C941F7F59F3F42AC017AD1E650546206B8228A@GDUKADH850.uk1.r-org.net> Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 10:38:19 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <7BCADB22-9FC6-4C79-AAD6-26526C6083FA@nic.cz> References: <83C941F7F59F3F42AC017AD1E650546206B8228A@GDUKADH850.uk1.r-org.net> To: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1257) X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.96.5 at mail X-Virus-Status: Clean Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] Structure of data models X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 08:38:21 -0000 On May 21, 2012, at 4:51 PM, = wrote: > As a newcomer to writing and implementing YANG modules, I have a = general question. I am trying to create a data model for radios. Should = the radio data model comprise a set of independent top-level modules = that address different aspects of radio configuration (system = management, routing, airside interface, etc.), or should there be one = top-level module that imports and includes modules and submodules? And = if it is personal Just one note: importing a module doesn't mean that the data tree of the = imported module becomes part of the importing module's tree - it only = makes top-level groupings, typedefs etc. available inside the importing = module. Lada > preference, is there at least a strong steer one way or the other? >=20 -- Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C From Jonathan.Hansford@generaldynamics.uk.com Tue May 22 01:46:11 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31BEC21F84FC for ; Tue, 22 May 2012 01:46:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.397 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.397 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_21=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_23=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KkzaFJNRsYVE for ; Tue, 22 May 2012 01:46:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail1.bemta14.messagelabs.com (mail1.bemta14.messagelabs.com [193.109.254.98]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F1DD21F84FB for ; Tue, 22 May 2012 01:46:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [194.106.220.35:30939] by server-4.bemta-14.messagelabs.com id DF/69-11570-0525BBF4; Tue, 22 May 2012 08:46:08 +0000 X-Env-Sender: Jonathan.Hansford@generaldynamics.uk.com X-Msg-Ref: server-16.tower-91.messagelabs.com!1337676368!9339879!1 X-Originating-IP: [217.33.196.17] X-StarScan-Version: 6.5.10; banners=-,-,- X-VirusChecked: Checked Received: (qmail 20005 invoked from network); 22 May 2012 08:46:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.generaldynamics.uk.com) (217.33.196.17) by server-16.tower-91.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 22 May 2012 08:46:08 -0000 Received: from mail.compd.com (HELO gdukadh864.uk1.r-org.net) ([172.16.40.142]) by mail.generaldynamics.uk.com with ESMTP; 22 May 2012 09:46:06 +0100 Received: from GDUKADH850.uk1.r-org.net ([172.16.40.138]) by gdukadh864.uk1.r-org.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Tue, 22 May 2012 09:46:01 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 09:46:06 +0100 Message-ID: <83C941F7F59F3F42AC017AD1E650546206B823D9@GDUKADH850.uk1.r-org.net> In-Reply-To: <7BCADB22-9FC6-4C79-AAD6-26526C6083FA@nic.cz> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [netmod] Structure of data models Thread-Index: Ac039j1jmnD4KvMMQliBSnxZ2gHOxwAADo5w References: <83C941F7F59F3F42AC017AD1E650546206B8228A@GDUKADH850.uk1.r-org.net> <7BCADB22-9FC6-4C79-AAD6-26526C6083FA@nic.cz> From: To: X-NAIMIME-Disclaimer: 1 X-NAIMIME-Modified: 1 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 May 2012 08:46:01.0835 (UTC) FILETIME=[50F5D3B0:01CD37F7] Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] Structure of data models X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 08:46:11 -0000 So if the imported module has a top-level container with everything you want, but you need to augment some nodes, you need to define an equivalent top-level container as well as the augmentation? Jonathan > -----Original Message----- > From: Ladislav Lhotka [mailto:lhotka@nic.cz] > Sent: 22 May 2012 09:38 > To: Jonathan Hansford > Cc: netmod@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [netmod] Structure of data models >=20 >=20 > On May 21, 2012, at 4:51 PM, > wrote: >=20 > > As a newcomer to writing and implementing YANG modules, I have a general > question. I am trying to create a data model for radios. Should the radio > data model comprise a set of independent top-level modules that address > different aspects of radio configuration (system management, routing, > airside interface, etc.), or should there be one top-level module that > imports and includes modules and submodules? And if it is personal >=20 > Just one note: importing a module doesn't mean that the data tree of the > imported module becomes part of the importing module's tree - it only > makes top-level groupings, typedefs etc. available inside the importing > module. >=20 > Lada >=20 > > preference, is there at least a strong steer one way or the other? > > >=20 > -- > Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs > PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C >=20 >=20 >=20 This email and any files attached are intended for the addressee and may = contain information of a confidential nature. If you are not the intended= recipient, be aware that this email was sent to you in error and you sho= uld not disclose, distribute, print, copy or make other use of this email= or its attachments. Such actions, in fact, may be unlawful. In complianc= e with the various Regulations and Acts, General Dynamics United Kingdom = Limited reserves the right to monitor (and examine for viruses) all email= s and email attachments, both inbound and outbound. Email communications = and their attachments may not be secure or error- or virus-free and the c= ompany does not accept liability or responsibility for such matters or th= e consequences thereof. General Dynamics United Kingdom Limited, Register= ed Office: 21 Holborn Viaduct, London EC1A 2DY. Registered in England and= Wales No: 1911653.=20 From lhotka@nic.cz Tue May 22 02:59:41 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 967B921F8577 for ; Tue, 22 May 2012 02:59:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_23=0.6] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BQ3djT+HBc0W for ; Tue, 22 May 2012 02:59:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.nic.cz (mail.nic.cz [IPv6:2001:1488:800:400::400]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE90721F8555 for ; Tue, 22 May 2012 02:59:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.29.2.202] (unknown [77.48.224.120]) by mail.nic.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 286AC141234; Tue, 22 May 2012 11:59:40 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nic.cz; s=default; t=1337680780; bh=UvW0b5t5/Kg8oZxMO6jT/R9h5AOsGPxlcxVfJJuBIs8=; h=Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To; b=pjvAXD/r3vmVnjHbuErU37CY3JwtjQWo6IH6FbjBQexweN4MLi9sCYrR+6rjleEoU wwSzLDouc+4Eo5sT81DVLScRCKF44awzqwHSlKvgcOPf7dRbp54FDw1onEhGjzO2oK Y2E4pHCc4B9SsohfJCIS5hIdY8ZMr/4cZoTDrUHc= Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1257) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Ladislav Lhotka In-Reply-To: <83C941F7F59F3F42AC017AD1E650546206B823D9@GDUKADH850.uk1.r-org.net> Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 11:59:34 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <83C941F7F59F3F42AC017AD1E650546206B8228A@GDUKADH850.uk1.r-org.net> <7BCADB22-9FC6-4C79-AAD6-26526C6083FA@nic.cz> <83C941F7F59F3F42AC017AD1E650546206B823D9@GDUKADH850.uk1.r-org.net> To: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1257) X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.96.5 at mail X-Virus-Status: Clean Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] Structure of data models X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 09:59:41 -0000 On May 22, 2012, at 10:46 AM, = wrote: > So if the imported module has a top-level container with everything = you > want, but you need to augment some nodes, you need to define an > equivalent top-level container as well as the augmentation? I am not sure that I understand your question but: If module A imports module B, it can augment stuff anywhere in the B's = data tree. However, in order to get the augmented module B into your = data model, you have to advertise both A and B in . Lada =20 >=20 > Jonathan >=20 >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Ladislav Lhotka [mailto:lhotka@nic.cz] >> Sent: 22 May 2012 09:38 >> To: Jonathan Hansford >> Cc: netmod@ietf.org >> Subject: Re: [netmod] Structure of data models >>=20 >>=20 >> On May 21, 2012, at 4:51 PM, > >> wrote: >>=20 >>> As a newcomer to writing and implementing YANG modules, I have a > general >> question. I am trying to create a data model for radios. Should the > radio >> data model comprise a set of independent top-level modules that > address >> different aspects of radio configuration (system management, routing, >> airside interface, etc.), or should there be one top-level module = that >> imports and includes modules and submodules? And if it is personal >>=20 >> Just one note: importing a module doesn't mean that the data tree of > the >> imported module becomes part of the importing module's tree - it only >> makes top-level groupings, typedefs etc. available inside the > importing >> module. >>=20 >> Lada >>=20 >>> preference, is there at least a strong steer one way or the other? >>>=20 >>=20 >> -- >> Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs >> PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 -- Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C From j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de Tue May 22 03:13:17 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 008BC21F8559 for ; Tue, 22 May 2012 03:13:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.249 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zlkvI5Y2BRjW for ; Tue, 22 May 2012 03:13:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de (hermes.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.23]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 471B021F8552 for ; Tue, 22 May 2012 03:13:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (demetrius3.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.48]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48E7E20C10; Tue, 22 May 2012 12:13:15 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at jacobs-university.de Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de ([212.201.44.23]) by localhost (demetrius3.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.32]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RRUq57HLnhax; Tue, 22 May 2012 12:13:15 +0200 (CEST) Received: from elstar.local (elstar.jacobs.jacobs-university.de [10.50.231.133]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id B159F20AFA; Tue, 22 May 2012 12:13:14 +0200 (CEST) Received: by elstar.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id 025DC1F1E52E; Tue, 22 May 2012 12:13:13 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 12:13:13 +0200 From: Juergen Schoenwaelder To: Ladislav Lhotka Message-ID: <20120522101313.GB3944@elstar.local> Mail-Followup-To: Ladislav Lhotka , Jonathan.Hansford@generaldynamics.uk.com, netmod@ietf.org References: <83C941F7F59F3F42AC017AD1E650546206B8228A@GDUKADH850.uk1.r-org.net> <7BCADB22-9FC6-4C79-AAD6-26526C6083FA@nic.cz> <83C941F7F59F3F42AC017AD1E650546206B823D9@GDUKADH850.uk1.r-org.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: Jonathan.Hansford@generaldynamics.uk.com, netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] Structure of data models X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: Juergen Schoenwaelder List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 10:13:17 -0000 On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 11:59:34AM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > > On May 22, 2012, at 10:46 AM, wrote: > > > So if the imported module has a top-level container with everything you > > want, but you need to augment some nodes, you need to define an > > equivalent top-level container as well as the augmentation? > > I am not sure that I understand your question but: > > If module A imports module B, it can augment stuff anywhere in the B's data tree. However, in order to get the augmented module B into your data model, you have to advertise both A and B in . > ... because this is the way you get to know the different namespaces that are involved. /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103 From dromasca@avaya.com Tue May 22 04:12:53 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6851A21F85CF for ; Tue, 22 May 2012 04:12:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.766 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.766 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.167, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kwWBNbDZ-ePn for ; Tue, 22 May 2012 04:12:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com (co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.13.100]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B267221F85D0 for ; Tue, 22 May 2012 04:12:52 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av8EAO5zu0/GmAcF/2dsb2JhbABEtBKBB4IVAQEBAQMSHgo/DAQCAQgNAQIBBAEBAQoGDAsBBgFFCQgBAQQBEggah2yhCZ0diwiEWmIDmwyJf4Jr X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.75,638,1330923600"; d="scan'208";a="348858122" Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.5]) by co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 22 May 2012 07:11:12 -0400 Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.13]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 22 May 2012 07:10:52 -0400 x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 13:12:50 +0200 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20120521.224619.428583399.mbj@tail-f.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [netmod] Structure of data models Thread-Index: Ac03ksuOYarbNtQWT3KMGs3qHpOleQAeOT6A References: <83C941F7F59F3F42AC017AD1E650546206B8228A@GDUKADH850.uk1.r-org.net><4C07D73A-6AA7-412D-B768-D5A736A7EB15@nic.cz><20120521164945.GB1986@elstar.local> <20120521.224619.428583399.mbj@tail-f.com> From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: "Martin Bjorklund" , Cc: Jonathan.Hansford@generaldynamics.uk.com, netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] Structure of data models X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 11:12:53 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: netmod-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:netmod-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Martin Bjorklund > Sent: Monday, May 21, 2012 11:46 PM > To: j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de > Cc: Jonathan.Hansford@generaldynamics.uk.com; netmod@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [netmod] Structure of data models >=20 > Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > > On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 05:07:13PM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > On May 21, 2012, at 4:51 PM, > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > As a newcomer to writing and implementing YANG modules, I have a > general > > > > question. I am trying to create a data model for radios. Should > the radio > > > > data model comprise a set of independent top-level modules that > address > > > > different aspects of radio configuration (system management, > routing, > > > > airside interface, etc.), or should there be one top-level module > that > > > > imports and includes modules and submodules? And if it is > personal > > > > preference, is there at least a strong steer one way or the > other? > > > > > > Both are possible although the first option (multiple top-level > modules) is > > > simpler and the existing NETMOD modules use it. > > > > > > > Simpler tends to be subjective. ;-) What we need is a simple to > > understand list of technical trade-off so that people can determine > > for themself what is best concerning their requirements. Using > > submodules for instance makes related stuff live in one namespace, > > using multiple modules requires to deal with a different namespace > for > > each module. Using one gigantic module might make change management > > complicated (but that again depends how stuff is 'published'). In > > other words, we would need a list of criteria and then people have > > something to work through in order to make their own informed > > decision. >=20 > Another thing to think about is if existing generic data models can be > used. I do not know enough about this radio config to know if it > makes sense to use the ietf-interface model for the "airside > interfaces", or if the ietf-routing framework could be used for this > routing. >=20 [[DR]] ... which is an implicit argument for the multiple top-level design.=20 Dan From internet-drafts@ietf.org Fri May 25 00:53:01 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A88621F855F; Fri, 25 May 2012 00:53:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.514 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.514 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.085, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4YICRYlj+Uzw; Fri, 25 May 2012 00:53:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D13B221F8463; Fri, 25 May 2012 00:53:00 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.02 Message-ID: <20120525075300.30031.53088.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 00:53:00 -0700 Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-routing-cfg-03.txt X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 07:53:01 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the NETCONF Data Modeling Language Workin= g Group of the IETF. Title : A YANG Data Model for Routing Configuration Author(s) : Ladislav Lhotka Filename : draft-ietf-netmod-routing-cfg-03.txt Pages : 62 Date : 2012-05-25 This document contains a specification of three YANG modules. Together they form the core routing data model which serves as a framework for configuring a routing subsystem. It is therefore expected that this module will be augmented by additional YANG modules defining data models for individual routing protocols and other related functions. The core routing data model provides common building blocks for such configurations - router instances, routes, routing tables, routing protocols and route filters. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-netmod-routing-cfg-03.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-netmod-routing-cfg-03.txt The IETF datatracker page for this Internet-Draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-routing-cfg/ From lhotka@nic.cz Fri May 25 01:28:18 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD1D721F85D0 for ; Fri, 25 May 2012 01:28:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_23=0.6] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ebWyX7vH0Ws1 for ; Fri, 25 May 2012 01:28:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.nic.cz (mail.nic.cz [IPv6:2001:1488:800:400::400]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6B4721F85C7 for ; Fri, 25 May 2012 01:28:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.29.2.201] (unknown [77.48.224.120]) by mail.nic.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0B188141260 for ; Fri, 25 May 2012 10:28:16 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nic.cz; s=default; t=1337934496; bh=IiaOKbDJpnyRBWityrHH8sZ53kOmoFMx80WSqsB7Kjw=; h=From:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Subject:Date: References:To:Message-Id:Mime-Version; b=x8ubRLy5711ao64dgQ9DbxkanEqcAJYcMXJB5GAvCfaoQQh2WQNW4Z3IVr4mRZDu4 yE1PG6yOBgrhnIaY7Fv0eo4h7iDdlQNUffHYMG24qWodAMh9rKj0I3LqH1dIDiSUVk Vk92bSARTx0lhwuf7bCizi6AskSr9gg/u9ijXqe8= From: Ladislav Lhotka Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 10:28:15 +0200 References: <20120525075300.30031.77475.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> To: netmod@ietf.org Message-Id: <70B69946-CA88-4F44-B2EA-47ADD990F55B@nic.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1278) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1278) X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.96.5 at mail X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: [netmod] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-netmod-routing-cfg-03.txt X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 08:28:19 -0000 Hi, this is a new revision of the routing-cfg draft that mainly incorporates = the comments from the four reviews by routing area experts. I am not = aware of any outstanding issues, so this revision should be ready for = WGLC. Lada Begin forwarded message: > From: internet-drafts@ietf.org > Subject: New Version Notification for = draft-ietf-netmod-routing-cfg-03.txt > Date: May 25, 2012 9:53:00 AM GMT+02:00 > To: lhotka@nic.cz >=20 > A new version of I-D, draft-ietf-netmod-routing-cfg-03.txt has been = successfully submitted by Ladislav Lhotka and posted to the IETF = repository. >=20 > Filename: draft-ietf-netmod-routing-cfg > Revision: 03 > Title: A YANG Data Model for Routing Configuration > Creation date: 2012-05-25 > WG ID: netmod > Number of pages: 62 >=20 > Abstract: > This document contains a specification of three YANG modules. > Together they form the core routing data model which serves as a > framework for configuring a routing subsystem. It is therefore > expected that this module will be augmented by additional YANG > modules defining data models for individual routing protocols and > other related functions. The core routing data model provides = common > building blocks for such configurations - router instances, routes, > routing tables, routing protocols and route filters. >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > The IETF Secretariat -- Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C From andy@netconfcentral.org Wed May 30 12:54:01 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4733511E8123 for ; Wed, 30 May 2012 12:54:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ekroxeq8i2U3 for ; Wed, 30 May 2012 12:54:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from omr17.networksolutionsemail.com (omr17.networksolutionsemail.com [205.178.146.67]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 457B711E80BC for ; Wed, 30 May 2012 12:53:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cm-omr9 (mail.networksolutionsemail.com [205.178.146.50]) by omr17.networksolutionsemail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q4UJrwvJ032431 for ; Wed, 30 May 2012 15:53:58 -0400 Authentication-Results: cm-omr9 smtp.user=andy@netconfcentral.org; auth=pass (CRAM-MD5) X-Authenticated-UID: andy@netconfcentral.org Received: from [75.84.168.164] ([75.84.168.164:51729] helo=[192.168.0.168]) by cm-omr9 (envelope-from ) (ecelerity 2.2.2.41 r(31179/31189)) with ESMTPSA (cipher=AES256-SHA) id AF/02-05613-5DA76CF4; Wed, 30 May 2012 15:53:58 -0400 Message-ID: <4FC67AD4.7030109@netconfcentral.org> Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 12:53:56 -0700 From: Andy Bierman User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120430 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: NETCONF , NETMOD Working Group References: <20120530194510.25892.75568.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20120530194510.25892.75568.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <20120530194510.25892.75568.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [netmod] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-bierman-netconf-yang-api-00.txt X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 19:54:01 -0000 FYI, Martin and I wrote a draft defining an HTTP-based API integrated with NETCONF, using YANG data models. We would like to discuss this draft at the Vancouver IETF meeting. thanks, Andy -------- Original Message -------- Subject: I-D Action: draft-bierman-netconf-yang-api-00.txt Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 12:45:10 -0700 From: internet-drafts@ietf.org Reply-To: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. Title : YANG-API Protocol Author(s) : Andy Bierman Martin Bjorklund Filename : draft-bierman-netconf-yang-api-00.txt Pages : 83 Date : 2012-05-30 This document describes a RESTful protocol that provides a programmatic interface over HTTP for accessing data defined in YANG, using the datastores defined in NETCONF. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-bierman-netconf-yang-api-00.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-bierman-netconf-yang-api-00.txt The IETF datatracker page for this Internet-Draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-bierman-netconf-yang-api/ _______________________________________________ I-D-Announce mailing list I-D-Announce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt From kwatsen@juniper.net Wed May 30 13:52:22 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A59A821F874F; Wed, 30 May 2012 13:52:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZgQ2KoEB2TV9; Wed, 30 May 2012 13:52:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from exprod7og108.obsmtp.com (exprod7og108.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.169]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 557B621F85CD; Wed, 30 May 2012 13:52:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from P-EMHUB02-HQ.jnpr.net ([66.129.224.36]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob108.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKT8aIhOXSm81dd8lh9GzInjJVNVBB3hxR@postini.com; Wed, 30 May 2012 13:52:21 PDT Received: from EMBX01-HQ.jnpr.net ([fe80::c821:7c81:f21f:8bc7]) by P-EMHUB02-HQ.jnpr.net ([fe80::88f9:77fd:dfc:4d51%11]) with mapi; Wed, 30 May 2012 13:51:14 -0700 From: Kent Watsen To: Andy Bierman Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 13:51:11 -0700 Thread-Topic: [Netconf] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-bierman-netconf-yang-api-00.txt Thread-Index: Ac0+nfkHjUS08luhQ3+kHD/9/9PNAwABp1xw Message-ID: <84600D05C20FF943918238042D7670FD48CC013611@EMBX01-HQ.jnpr.net> References: <20120530194510.25892.75568.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <4FC67AD4.7030109@netconfcentral.org> In-Reply-To: <4FC67AD4.7030109@netconfcentral.org> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: NETCONF , NETMOD Working Group Subject: Re: [netmod] [Netconf] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-bierman-netconf-yang-api-00.txt X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 20:52:22 -0000 The email from Mehmet on Mar 30 indicated that, in the WG session in Paris,= it had "been proposed, for the time being, to not plan the REST API as a c= hartered document". I'd assumed that "for the time being" would be more t= han two months, or was it intended to bring a more concrete proposal to the= next IEFT meeting? -----Original Message----- From: netconf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:netconf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf = Of Andy Bierman Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2012 3:54 PM To: NETCONF; NETMOD Working Group Subject: [Netconf] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-bierman-netconf-yang-api-00.txt FYI, Martin and I wrote a draft defining an HTTP-based API integrated with NETCONF, using YANG data models. We would like to discuss this draft at the Vancouver IETF meeting. thanks, Andy -------- Original Message -------- Subject: I-D Action: draft-bierman-netconf-yang-api-00.txt Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 12:45:10 -0700 From: internet-drafts@ietf.org Reply-To: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. Title : YANG-API Protocol Author(s) : Andy Bierman Martin Bjorklund Filename : draft-bierman-netconf-yang-api-00.txt Pages : 83 Date : 2012-05-30 This document describes a RESTful protocol that provides a programmatic interface over HTTP for accessing data defined in YANG, using the datastores defined in NETCONF. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-bierman-netconf-yang-api-00.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-bierman-netconf-yang-api-00.txt The IETF datatracker page for this Internet-Draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-bierman-netconf-yang-api/ _______________________________________________ I-D-Announce mailing list I-D-Announce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt _______________________________________________ Netconf mailing list Netconf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf From andy@netconfcentral.org Wed May 30 14:05:23 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25BF721F865D for ; Wed, 30 May 2012 14:05:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3dYs1bc7W79k for ; Wed, 30 May 2012 14:05:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from omr11.networksolutionsemail.com (omr11.networksolutionsemail.com [205.178.146.61]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E53A021F85CD for ; Wed, 30 May 2012 14:05:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cm-omr7 (mail.networksolutionsemail.com [205.178.146.50]) by omr11.networksolutionsemail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q4UL5G29013012 for ; Wed, 30 May 2012 17:05:17 -0400 Authentication-Results: cm-omr7 smtp.user=andy@netconfcentral.org; auth=pass (CRAM-MD5) X-Authenticated-UID: andy@netconfcentral.org Received: from [75.84.168.164] ([75.84.168.164:53249] helo=[192.168.0.168]) by cm-omr7 (envelope-from ) (ecelerity 2.2.2.41 r(31179/31189)) with ESMTPSA (cipher=AES256-SHA) id 43/70-20637-B8B86CF4; Wed, 30 May 2012 17:05:16 -0400 Message-ID: <4FC68B89.6000906@netconfcentral.org> Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 14:05:13 -0700 From: Andy Bierman User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120430 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kent Watsen References: <20120530194510.25892.75568.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <4FC67AD4.7030109@netconfcentral.org> <84600D05C20FF943918238042D7670FD48CC013611@EMBX01-HQ.jnpr.net> In-Reply-To: <84600D05C20FF943918238042D7670FD48CC013611@EMBX01-HQ.jnpr.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: NETCONF , NETMOD Working Group Subject: Re: [netmod] [Netconf] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-bierman-netconf-yang-api-00.txt X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 21:05:23 -0000 On 05/30/2012 01:51 PM, Kent Watsen wrote: > The email from Mehmet on Mar 30 indicated that, in the WG session in Paris, it had "been proposed, for the time being, to not plan the REST API as a chartered document". I'd assumed that "for the time being" would be more than two months, or was it intended to bring a more concrete proposal to the next IEFT meeting? Maybe NETCONF is not the proper WG to propose an HTTP/REST protocol. That is one of the open issues. A concrete proposal is needed to move discussion forward, regardless of the mailing list used. Anyone can propose a draft at any time. Whether or not (and when) it gets chartered by a WG is another matter. We've been discussing Netconf Light for almost a year, and it isn't chartered yet. The SNMP config draft in NETMOD was first published in October 2010 and that is not chartered yet. We have a long history of creating long history out of the standards process ;-) Andy > > > -----Original Message----- > From: netconf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:netconf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Andy Bierman > Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2012 3:54 PM > To: NETCONF; NETMOD Working Group > Subject: [Netconf] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-bierman-netconf-yang-api-00.txt > > FYI, > > Martin and I wrote a draft defining an HTTP-based API integrated > with NETCONF, using YANG data models. We would like to discuss > this draft at the Vancouver IETF meeting. > > > thanks, > Andy > > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: I-D Action: draft-bierman-netconf-yang-api-00.txt > Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 12:45:10 -0700 > From: internet-drafts@ietf.org > Reply-To: internet-drafts@ietf.org > To: i-d-announce@ietf.org > > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. > > Title : YANG-API Protocol > Author(s) : Andy Bierman > Martin Bjorklund > Filename : draft-bierman-netconf-yang-api-00.txt > Pages : 83 > Date : 2012-05-30 > > This document describes a RESTful protocol that provides a > programmatic interface over HTTP for accessing data defined in YANG, > using the datastores defined in NETCONF. > > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-bierman-netconf-yang-api-00.txt > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-bierman-netconf-yang-api-00.txt > > The IETF datatracker page for this Internet-Draft is: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-bierman-netconf-yang-api/ > > _______________________________________________ > I-D-Announce mailing list > I-D-Announce@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce > Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html > or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt > > > > _______________________________________________ > Netconf mailing list > Netconf@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf > > From andy@netconfcentral.org Thu May 31 11:16:04 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5BAA21F86DB for ; Thu, 31 May 2012 11:16:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kSHwd8aYIG59 for ; Thu, 31 May 2012 11:16:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from omr9.networksolutionsemail.com (omr9.networksolutionsemail.com [205.178.146.59]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16EB121F86DA for ; Thu, 31 May 2012 11:16:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cm-omr14 (mail.networksolutionsemail.com [205.178.146.50]) by omr9.networksolutionsemail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q4VIG2Xi003855 for ; Thu, 31 May 2012 14:16:02 -0400 Authentication-Results: cm-omr14 smtp.user=andy@netconfcentral.org; auth=pass (CRAM-MD5) X-Authenticated-UID: andy@netconfcentral.org Received: from [75.84.168.164] ([75.84.168.164:49046] helo=[192.168.0.168]) by cm-omr14 (envelope-from ) (ecelerity 2.2.2.41 r(31179/31189)) with ESMTPSA (cipher=AES256-SHA) id BE/67-31525-265B7CF4; Thu, 31 May 2012 14:16:02 -0400 Message-ID: <4FC7B560.8040604@netconfcentral.org> Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 11:16:00 -0700 From: Andy Bierman User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120430 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: NETMOD Working Group Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [netmod] yang-identifier type X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 18:16:04 -0000 Hi, I noticed in ietf-netconf-acm.yang that leafs such as "module-name" "rpc-name", and "notification-name" are used to represent YANG identifiers, but the data type is plain "string". IMO, this is not correct. The string should be constrained to only valid YANG identifiers, which chould be a standard typedef. I think the ietf-yang-types module needs to be updated with a typedef for yang-identifier. E.g.: typedef yang-identifier { type string { length "1..max"; pattern '[a-z,A-Z,_][a-z,A-Z,0-9,\-,_,\.]*'; } description "YANG identifier string"; //An identifier MUST NOT start with (('X'|'x') ('M'|'m') ('L'|'l')) // identifier = (ALPHA / "_") *(ALPHA / DIGIT / "_" / "-" / ".") reference "RFC 6020, page 163"; } Does anybody know how to write a regex pattern for the must not start with "xml" requirement that is not in the ABNF? Andy From andy@netconfcentral.org Thu May 31 12:19:13 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 880D921F860B for ; Thu, 31 May 2012 12:19:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DnxoCw2vF21L for ; Thu, 31 May 2012 12:19:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from omr17.networksolutionsemail.com (omr17.networksolutionsemail.com [205.178.146.67]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFE4321F8609 for ; Thu, 31 May 2012 12:19:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cm-omr11 (mail.networksolutionsemail.com [205.178.146.50]) by omr17.networksolutionsemail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q4VJJCJr012698 for ; Thu, 31 May 2012 15:19:12 -0400 Authentication-Results: cm-omr11 smtp.user=andy@netconfcentral.org; auth=pass (CRAM-MD5) X-Authenticated-UID: andy@netconfcentral.org Received: from [75.84.168.164] ([75.84.168.164:50341] helo=[192.168.0.168]) by cm-omr11 (envelope-from ) (ecelerity 2.2.2.41 r(31179/31189)) with ESMTPSA (cipher=AES256-SHA) id BF/57-11548-F24C7CF4; Thu, 31 May 2012 15:19:11 -0400 Message-ID: <4FC7C42D.9070106@netconfcentral.org> Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 12:19:09 -0700 From: Andy Bierman User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120430 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: NETMOD Working Group Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [netmod] import by revision X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 19:19:13 -0000 Hi, I think the use-case for import-by-revision in sec. 5.1.1 is really vague and the example is not clear. When the author of "a" publishes a new revision, the changes may not be acceptable to the author of "b". If the new revision is acceptable, the author of "b" can republish with an updated revision in the "import" statement. This is wrong. Why wouldn't the changes to module "a" be acceptable if the author follows the update rules in section 10? The import exact revision rule is too fragile and does not match any real use cases: 7.1.5.1. The import's revision-date Statement The import's "revision-date" statement is used to specify the exact version of the module to import. The "revision-date" statement MUST match the most recent "revision" statement in the imported module. The most common and important use case is to require "version>= X", not "version == X". I know this can cause optional nodes to suddenly appear in expanded uses-stmts, but this is actually a feature (reusing multiple versions of a complex type in the same data model is a bad idea). The relevant revision date is the one that the client or other data model starts relying on the presence of a particular definition. After that point, since only legal changes are being made, the client or other data model can upgrade to a new version without breaking anything. Andy From mbj@tail-f.com Thu May 31 13:44:51 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CFAA21F85B9 for ; Thu, 31 May 2012 13:44:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.046 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.046 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sTndaGIgPeFa for ; Thu, 31 May 2012 13:44:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.tail-f.com (de-2007.d.ipeer.se [213.180.74.102]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7787521F8540 for ; Thu, 31 May 2012 13:44:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (c213-100-166-57.cust.tele2.se [213.100.166.57]) by mail.tail-f.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3DCB91200AE5; Thu, 31 May 2012 22:44:48 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 22:44:47 +0200 (CEST) Message-Id: <20120531.224447.489590095.mbj@tail-f.com> To: andy@netconfcentral.org From: Martin Bjorklund In-Reply-To: <4FC7B560.8040604@netconfcentral.org> References: <4FC7B560.8040604@netconfcentral.org> X-Mailer: Mew version 6.4 on Emacs 23.3 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] yang-identifier type X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 20:44:51 -0000 Andy Bierman wrote: > I think the ietf-yang-types module needs to be updated with a typedef > for yang-identifier. +1. I think Juergen has collected a few new typedefs / groupings to be included in a new revision of this module. /martin From mbj@tail-f.com Thu May 31 14:00:42 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 092BD11E808C for ; Thu, 31 May 2012 14:00:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.046 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.046 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4zMrPHF5DqrS for ; Thu, 31 May 2012 14:00:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.tail-f.com (de-2007.d.ipeer.se [213.180.74.102]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 676D611E8080 for ; Thu, 31 May 2012 14:00:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (c213-100-166-57.cust.tele2.se [213.100.166.57]) by mail.tail-f.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B19271200AE5; Thu, 31 May 2012 23:00:40 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 23:00:40 +0200 (CEST) Message-Id: <20120531.230040.65100516.mbj@tail-f.com> To: andy@netconfcentral.org From: Martin Bjorklund In-Reply-To: <4FC7C42D.9070106@netconfcentral.org> References: <4FC7C42D.9070106@netconfcentral.org> X-Mailer: Mew version 6.4 on Emacs 23.3 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] import by revision X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 21:00:42 -0000 Hi, I think I agree with you. I have never seen import by revision being used. include by revision, however, is used, and useful. Note that RFC 6087 says: The revision-date substatement within the imports statement SHOULD be present if any groupings are used from the external module. /martin Andy Bierman wrote: > Hi, > > I think the use-case for import-by-revision in sec. 5.1.1 is > really vague and the example is not clear. > > When the author of "a" publishes a new revision, the changes may not > be acceptable to the author of "b". If the new revision is > acceptable, the author of "b" can republish with an updated revision > in the "import" statement. > > > This is wrong. Why wouldn't the changes to module "a" be acceptable > if the author follows the update rules in section 10? > > The import exact revision rule is too fragile and does not match > any real use cases: > > 7.1.5.1. The import's revision-date Statement > > The import's "revision-date" statement is used to specify the exact > version of the module to import. The "revision-date" statement MUST > match the most recent "revision" statement in the imported module. > > The most common and important use case is to require "version>= X", not "version == X". > I know this can cause optional nodes to suddenly appear in expanded uses-stmts, > but this is actually a feature (reusing multiple versions of a complex type in > the same data model is a bad idea). > > The relevant revision date is the one that the client or other data model starts > relying on the presence of a particular definition. After that point, since > only legal changes are being made, the client or other data model can upgrade > to a new version without breaking anything. > > > Andy > > > _______________________________________________ > netmod mailing list > netmod@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod > From andy@netconfcentral.org Thu May 31 16:18:52 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D834B21F8638 for ; Thu, 31 May 2012 16:18:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eDYbHH2cgUV0 for ; Thu, 31 May 2012 16:18:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from omr15.networksolutionsemail.com (omr15.networksolutionsemail.com [205.178.146.65]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 291DE21F8630 for ; Thu, 31 May 2012 16:18:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cm-omr10 (mail.networksolutionsemail.com [205.178.146.50]) by omr15.networksolutionsemail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q4VNIoxk011254 for ; Thu, 31 May 2012 19:18:51 -0400 Authentication-Results: cm-omr10 smtp.user=andy@netconfcentral.org; auth=pass (CRAM-MD5) X-Authenticated-UID: andy@netconfcentral.org Received: from [75.84.168.164] ([75.84.168.164:54802] helo=[192.168.0.168]) by cm-omr10 (envelope-from ) (ecelerity 2.2.2.41 r(31179/31189)) with ESMTPSA (cipher=AES256-SHA) id 90/E4-26110-A5CF7CF4; Thu, 31 May 2012 19:18:50 -0400 Message-ID: <4FC7FC58.7090506@netconfcentral.org> Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 16:18:48 -0700 From: Andy Bierman User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120430 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Martin Bjorklund References: <4FC7C42D.9070106@netconfcentral.org> <20120531.230040.65100516.mbj@tail-f.com> In-Reply-To: <20120531.230040.65100516.mbj@tail-f.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] import by revision X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 23:18:53 -0000 On 05/31/2012 02:00 PM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > Hi, > > I think I agree with you. I have never seen import by revision being > used. include by revision, however, is used, and useful. I suppose, but I don't agree that XML namespaces are somehow precious resources that need to be used over and over again. Submodules promote giant kitchen-sink module design, so I like to discourage their use. > Note that RFC 6087 says: > > The revision-date substatement within the imports statement SHOULD be > present if any groupings are used from the external module. This is really because YANG conformance is so primitive. The guideline probably needs MUST, not SHOULD. Adding new objects to the conformance of module X as a side effect of a change in module Y is a weakness of the YANG conformance model. > > > /martin > Andy > > Andy Bierman wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I think the use-case for import-by-revision in sec. 5.1.1 is >> really vague and the example is not clear. >> >> When the author of "a" publishes a new revision, the changes may not >> be acceptable to the author of "b". If the new revision is >> acceptable, the author of "b" can republish with an updated revision >> in the "import" statement. >> >> >> This is wrong. Why wouldn't the changes to module "a" be acceptable >> if the author follows the update rules in section 10? >> >> The import exact revision rule is too fragile and does not match >> any real use cases: >> >> 7.1.5.1. The import's revision-date Statement >> >> The import's "revision-date" statement is used to specify the exact >> version of the module to import. The "revision-date" statement MUST >> match the most recent "revision" statement in the imported module. >> >> The most common and important use case is to require "version>= X", not "version == X". >> I know this can cause optional nodes to suddenly appear in expanded uses-stmts, >> but this is actually a feature (reusing multiple versions of a complex type in >> the same data model is a bad idea). >> >> The relevant revision date is the one that the client or other data model starts >> relying on the presence of a particular definition. After that point, since >> only legal changes are being made, the client or other data model can upgrade >> to a new version without breaking anything. >> >> >> Andy >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> netmod mailing list >> netmod@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod >> > From j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de Thu May 31 23:46:39 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8D6421F8554 for ; Thu, 31 May 2012 23:46:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.249 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id s+bpDL+jHioo for ; Thu, 31 May 2012 23:46:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de (hermes.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.23]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1810821F8551 for ; Thu, 31 May 2012 23:46:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (demetrius1.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.46]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1930020C2C; Fri, 1 Jun 2012 08:46:38 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at jacobs-university.de Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de ([212.201.44.23]) by localhost (demetrius1.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.32]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qaNz0F5kcKEU; Fri, 1 Jun 2012 08:46:38 +0200 (CEST) Received: from elstar.local (elstar.jacobs.jacobs-university.de [10.50.231.133]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7086020C0E; Fri, 1 Jun 2012 08:46:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: by elstar.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id BCE361F3182B; Fri, 1 Jun 2012 08:46:36 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2012 08:46:36 +0200 From: Juergen Schoenwaelder To: Martin Bjorklund Message-ID: <20120601064636.GA4194@elstar.local> Mail-Followup-To: Martin Bjorklund , andy@netconfcentral.org, netmod@ietf.org References: <4FC7B560.8040604@netconfcentral.org> <20120531.224447.489590095.mbj@tail-f.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120531.224447.489590095.mbj@tail-f.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] yang-identifier type X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: Juergen Schoenwaelder List-Id: NETMOD WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2012 06:46:39 -0000 On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 10:44:47PM +0200, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > Andy Bierman wrote: > > I think the ietf-yang-types module needs to be updated with a typedef > > for yang-identifier. > > +1. > > I think Juergen has collected a few new typedefs / groupings to be > included in a new revision of this module. I added this to my list for now. /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103