Re: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount-07.txt

[Ladislav Lhotka]

Martin Bjorklund  writes:

> Hi,
>
> This version fixes the XPath context for parent-reference.
>
>
> However, there is one more thing to discuss, which is the term "mount
> point".  
>
> The current text says:
>
>- mount point: container or list node whose definition contains
>  the "mount-point" extension statement. The argument of the
>  "mount-point" statement defines the name of the mount point.
>
>
> So if we have:
> 
>   container top {
> container root {
>   yangmnt:mount-point ni;
> }
>   }
> 
> There is one mount point, the node /top/root, with the name "ni".
>
> Pretty confusing...   Does anyone have any comments around this?

What about this?

OLD

- mount point: container or list node whose definition contains
  the "mount-point" extension statement. The argument of the
  "mount-point" statement defines the name of the mount point.

NEW

- mount point: container or list node whose definition contains
  the "mount-point" extension statement. The argument of the
  "mount-point" statement defines a label that is used for
  referencing the mount point.

Lada

>
>
>
> /martin
>
>
>
>
>
> internet-dra...@ietf.org wrote:
>> 
>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts 
>> directories.
>> This draft is a work item of the Network Modeling WG of the IETF.
>> 
>> Title   : YANG Schema Mount
>> Authors : Martin Bjorklund
>>   Ladislav Lhotka
>>  Filename: draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount-07.txt
>>  Pages   : 27
>>  Date: 2017-09-27
>> 
>> Abstract:
>>This document defines a mechanism to combine YANG modules into the
>>schema defined in other YANG modules.
>> 
>> 
>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount/
>> 
>> There are also htmlized versions available at:
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount-07
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount-07
>> 
>> A diff from the previous version is available at:
>> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount-07
>> 
>> 
>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
>> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
>> 
>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>> 
>> ___
>> netmod mailing list
>> netmod@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>> 
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [netmod] draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model

[Jon Shallow]

 

Hi Mahesh,

 

I think that we can with a bit of re-work, use the interfaces concept.  The 
clue that I had missed was in the (now deleted in -04) text in the following 
section.

 

A.2.  A company proprietary module example  

 

   Access control list typically does not exist in isolation.  Instead,

   they are associated with a certain scope in which they are applied,

   for example, an interface of a set of interfaces.  How to attach an

   access control list to an interface (or other system artifact) is

   outside the scope of this model, as it depends on the specifics of

   the system model that is being applied.  However, in general, the

   general design pattern will involved adding a data node with a

   reference, or set of references, to ACLs that are to be applied to

   the interface.  For this purpose, the type definition "access-

   control-list-ref" can be used.

 

Thanks for your help.

 

Regards

 

Jon

 

From: Mahesh Jethanandani [mailto: mjethanand...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 04 October 2017 00:57
To: Jon Shallow
Cc: netmod@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netmod] draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model

 

Jon,

 

‘ordered-by user’ directive is useful to have on list of ACLs as/when they are 
applied. For example, in the latest published draft (-14) we added the 
'ordered-by user’ statement to the list of ACLs when they are applied to the 
interfaces. You would not order the “global” ACLs list (under access-lists), 
because another interface may want a different order of ACLs. 

 

Does that help?

 

___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod