Hi Juergen, Some thoughts in-lined.
With Regards, Rohit R Ranade -----Original Message----- From: Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de] Sent: 25 April 2018 16:12 To: Rohit R Ranade <rohitrran...@huawei.com> Cc: netc...@ietf.org; netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Netconf] [netconf] Comments on draft-ietf-netconf-nmda-netconf-05 On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 04:22:24AM +0000, Rohit R Ranade wrote: > Hi All, > > I plan to implement this draft and hence had some implementation related > clarifications. > > > 1. I feel that there should be more text added about "origin" filtering > mechanism. I am not clear about some aspects of origin filtering. > > RFC 8342 : NMDA RFC provides the below example > > <interfaces xmlns:or="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-origin" > or:origin="or:intended"> > <interface> > <name>lo0</name> > <description>loopback</description> > <ip-address or:origin="or:system">127.0.0.1</ip-address> > <ip-address>::1</ip-address> > </interface> > </interfaces> > If user provides <origin-filter> as "system" ONLY, then he will NOT get this > record in output. Because the keys have originated from "intended" . Right ? > So, If user wants to get the system originated data, he MUST give all the > origins in the <origin-filter> where the keys of the system data have > originated from. Can you please confirm whether this is OK. I would expect that <origin-filter>or:system</origin-filter> would select the ip-address tagged with or:origin="or:system" and that the system would return any necessary container or list elements and the necessary key elements (since otherwise the value returned is just useless). So the result would be: <interfaces xmlns:or="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-origin" or:origin="or:intended"> <interface> <name>lo0</name> <ip-address or:origin="or:system">127.0.0.1</ip-address> </interface> </interfaces> [Rohit R Ranade] While this looks OK for the origin filter, for the negated-origin-filter, for the same example given above, if <negated-origin-filter> or:intended<negated-origin-filter> is given, then it will give the "system" related nodes even if it encountered the "intended" node first, which the user definitely dint want included in the output ? Can you please confirm whether this is OK. Can you please clarify whether the negated filter has higher priority than the selected filter ? > Another example given in RFC 8342 is as below: > <interfaces xmlns:or="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-origin" > or:origin="or:intended"> > <interface or:origin="or:system"> > <name>lo0</name> > <ip-address>127.0.0.1</ip-address> > <ip-address>::1</ip-address> > </interface> > </interfaces> > > ? Here keys are originated from "system", but it is under container of > "intended". So if user gives "system" for "origin-filter", the output will > still NOT have this instance output ? We allow origin values on containers or lists in order to inherit them, i.e., to achieve a more compact encoding. Anyway, if a leaf node matches, then I think any encompassing containers and list should be included in the result so that the matching leaf can be reported. So you would return <interfaces xmlns:or="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-origin" or:origin="or:intended"> <interface or:origin="or:system"> <name>lo0</name> <ip-address>127.0.0.1</ip-address> <ip-address>::1</ip-address> </interface> </interfaces> instead of not returning anything at all. > ? Also the container is not defined as "presence" in C.3. Interface > Example, but still it has origin whether that is Ok ? Why not? [Rohit R Ranade] RFC 8342 Section 5.3.4 " The origin applies to all configuration nodes except non-presence containers. " /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103 <https://www.jacobs-university.de/> _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
