Lou Berger <lber...@labn.net> wrote: > Martin, > > On 2/4/2016 3:22 PM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > The way I understand the requirement from Lou et. al, which is also > > what structural mount supports, is a way to mount (or "relocate") a > > set of modules under a certain path. Currently the complete subtrees > > defined by this module set is mounted. This includes any augments. > > So for example, if you mount ietf-interfaces and ietf-ip under /x:foo, > > the result would be: > > > > /x:foo/if:interfaces/if:interface/ip:ipv4/... > > /x:foo/if:interfaces/if:interface/ip:ipv6/... > > > > etc. > > > > Structural mount does not currently support mounting of specific > > subtrees. > > > > I agree with Juergen that the term "top-level module" maybe is > > misleading. (In fact, I thought that this term refered to something > > else - once you have mounted ietf-interfaces in the module "x" as > > above, I thought that "x" was the top-level module, and ietf-interface > > was the non-top-level module). > > So what's a better way of referring to the type of mounted module?
In my view, any module can be mounted. Your original email had: 1. that there be a mechanism that allows the incorporation (or 'mounting') of the data model defined by one top-level module within another module. I think the word "top-level" can simply be removed from this sentence. /martin _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod