Kent Watsen <kwat...@juniper.net> writes: > Sure, one mandatory to implement format, others nice to have. > Interoperability good. Agreed. > > But why YANG-patch and not something built for the purpose > (e.g., YANG-diff) that, in particular, provides an actual diff as > opposed to a data-tree operation that only shows one of the > two values?
Such a format can be developed independently, I would support it. Lada > > Kent // contributor > > > On 10/4/18, 3:27 PM, "Andy Bierman" > <a...@yumaworks.com<mailto:a...@yumaworks.com>> wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 12:07 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder > <j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de<mailto:j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de>> > wrote: > Folks, the more formats there are, the less interoperability we > get. If there are multiple formats, is there a mandatory to implement > format? Does the mandatory to implement format depend on the protocol > that is being used? > > I prefer one format or if necessary I am fine with one mandatory to > implement format. An open ended collection of implementation specific > formats is super flexible but defeats the purpose of a standard, > namely interoperability. > > I agree there needs to be 1 mandatory-to-implement format. > > IMO this needs to be YANG Patch because it is more precise then constructing > an XML tree with > operation attributes in it (e.g., how else do you represent a delete or a > move?) > Also, YANG Push is using YANG Patch format and common code for push and diff > would be > possible. > > I think other formats should be allowed. > This is very tool-specific. I could see how somebody might want > a textual patch of the XML representation to produce the new XML > representation. > > > /js > > Andy > > > On Thu, Oct 04, 2018 at 05:41:22PM +0000, Kent Watsen wrote: >> We agree that the diff-format should be client-selectable, modulo what the >> server supports. yang-patch and edit-config both are viable. Should we >> document them both? >> >> That said, since neither edit-config nor yang-patch are diffing formats, so >> much as formats for converting one data tree to another, would it make sense >> to define an actual diffing format? I would think that a diff would provide >> both values, not just a new value. >> >> Kent // contributor >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: netmod <netmod-boun...@ietf.org<mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org>> on >> behalf of Ladislav Lhotka <lho...@nic.cz<mailto:lho...@nic.cz>> >> Organization: CZ.NIC >> Date: Thursday, October 4, 2018 at 1:11 PM >> To: Robert Wilton <rwil...@cisco.com<mailto:rwil...@cisco.com>>, >> "netmod@ietf.org<mailto:netmod@ietf.org>" >> <netmod@ietf.org<mailto:netmod@ietf.org>> >> Subject: Re: [netmod] WG adoption poll for draft-clemm-netmod-nmda-diff-00 >> >> On Thu, 2018-10-04 at 14:17 +0100, Robert Wilton wrote: >> > >> > On 04/10/2018 13:51, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: >> > > On Thu, 2018-10-04 at 13:36 +0100, Robert Wilton wrote: >> > > > On 04/10/2018 11:14, Martin Bjorklund wrote: >> > > > > Phil Shafer <p...@juniper.net<mailto:p...@juniper.net>> wrote: >> > > > > > Bal?zs Lengyel writes: >> > > > > > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__tools.ietf.org_html_draft-2Dclemm-2Dnetmod-2Dnmda-2Ddiff-2D00&d=DwICAg&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=9zkP0xnJUvZGJ9EPoOH7Yhqn2gsBYaGTvjISlaJdcZo&m=7s6VdzzH9Ol3BOCbVLBarBrQ5fD0vTt8k_I2KDEN97c&s=gQWJtjc_2EF3QgRvABgZKsjqzuIw9yUq_xee6aFJOcw&e= >> > > > > > [I've moved to a "deep lurker" role here, but ...] >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Can we ensure this model contains a "format" leaf in the RPC's >> > > > > > input >> > > > > > so that future (and proprietary) formats can be supported? That >> > > > > > leaf can be an identityref that defaults to yang-patch. >> > > > > I think this is a good idea. I would prefer the edit-config format >> > > > > over YANG patch for describing a diff. The edit-config format is >> > > > > more >> > > > > suited for this purpose imo. >> > > > +1 >> > > > >> > > > I would like something closer to edit-config to be available via >> > > > RESTCONF as well. >> > > YANG Patch is IMO better because it clearly separates the target for the >> > > edits >> > > from the new content. >> > > In edit-config these two are mixed together. >> > Yes, that is primarily why I prefer the edit-config. I perceive that it >> > is a denser and more efficient format. I think that it is both easier >> > to construct (when diffing two trees) and also more efficient to apply >> > when generating an updated tree. >> >> Except for certain corner cases, for example if two trees differ only in the >> value of a single leaf but this leaf happens to be a list key. >> >> Lada >> >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Rob >> > >> > >> > > That being said, I support specifying format/media-type and having >> > > potentially >> > > multiple options. >> > > >> > > Lada >> > > >> > > > Thanks, >> > > > Rob >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > /martin >> > > > > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ >> > > > > netmod mailing list >> > > > > netmod@ietf.org<mailto:netmod@ietf.org> >> > > > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_netmod&d=DwICAg&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=9zkP0xnJUvZGJ9EPoOH7Yhqn2gsBYaGTvjISlaJdcZo&m=7s6VdzzH9Ol3BOCbVLBarBrQ5fD0vTt8k_I2KDEN97c&s=RVJcg5pzHW-zi1OboCL4SX2huW9euHiVRSCor9n_APQ&e= >> > > > > . >> > > > > >> > > > _______________________________________________ >> > > > netmod mailing list >> > > > netmod@ietf.org<mailto:netmod@ietf.org> >> > > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_netmod&d=DwICAg&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=9zkP0xnJUvZGJ9EPoOH7Yhqn2gsBYaGTvjISlaJdcZo&m=7s6VdzzH9Ol3BOCbVLBarBrQ5fD0vTt8k_I2KDEN97c&s=RVJcg5pzHW-zi1OboCL4SX2huW9euHiVRSCor9n_APQ&e= >> -- >> Ladislav Lhotka >> Head, CZ.NIC Labs >> PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> netmod mailing list >> netmod@ietf.org<mailto:netmod@ietf.org> >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_netmod&d=DwICAg&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=9zkP0xnJUvZGJ9EPoOH7Yhqn2gsBYaGTvjISlaJdcZo&m=7s6VdzzH9Ol3BOCbVLBarBrQ5fD0vTt8k_I2KDEN97c&s=RVJcg5pzHW-zi1OboCL4SX2huW9euHiVRSCor9n_APQ&e= >> >> _______________________________________________ >> netmod mailing list >> netmod@ietf.org<mailto:netmod@ietf.org> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_netmod&d=DwMFaQ&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=9zkP0xnJUvZGJ9EPoOH7Yhqn2gsBYaGTvjISlaJdcZo&m=O7d-b9gyPvsasJo1ueKk3doDH7f5S5WQLo8_W6W3qt4&s=5LHhbfQZeoqYlC40T3mm-AEz4rSsyRWYjqTK7LuWTPw&e=> > > -- > 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/<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.jacobs-2Duniversity.de_&d=DwMFaQ&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=9zkP0xnJUvZGJ9EPoOH7Yhqn2gsBYaGTvjISlaJdcZo&m=O7d-b9gyPvsasJo1ueKk3doDH7f5S5WQLo8_W6W3qt4&s=zh7qEPSmwviaSqZBqG1GcqItXwI9pwyqIFVW6xC8rK8&e=>> > > _______________________________________________ > netmod mailing list > netmod@ietf.org<mailto:netmod@ietf.org> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_netmod&d=DwMFaQ&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=9zkP0xnJUvZGJ9EPoOH7Yhqn2gsBYaGTvjISlaJdcZo&m=O7d-b9gyPvsasJo1ueKk3doDH7f5S5WQLo8_W6W3qt4&s=5LHhbfQZeoqYlC40T3mm-AEz4rSsyRWYjqTK7LuWTPw&e=> > > _______________________________________________ > netmod mailing list > netmod@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod -- Ladislav Lhotka Head, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67 _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
