On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 01:48:37AM -0700, Andy Bierman wrote: > > But you can tell the 2 subtrees apart this way. > If I change /foo from a container to a list, then how do you support both > implementations > of container /foo and list /foo at the same time? >
Well, all of this is the consequence of moving from the current naming system (module, path) to (module,path,version). Once we allow non-backwards compatible changes, then we may have to find ways to support different versions of a module (i.e, during session establishment the client selects a version context to work with). To be clear about my involvement in the versioning design team: I am personally not convinced that a different versioning scheme is going to be simpler; certain things that are simple and robust today will become more complex and fragile. I decided to get involved in order to point out that moving to a (module,path,version) naming scheme has many implications since everywhere where we currently use (module,path) we need to think about now required version context is coming from. This goes far beyond YANG imports, this impacts likely protocols, the proposed instance document storage format, NACM rules may need to be interpreted in a version context etc. /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
