Re: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-wu-netmod-factory-default-02.txt
One minor changes to address comments received from IETF 103 session discussion. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-wu-netmod-factory-default/ We authors believe it is ready for WG adoption now. -Qin -邮件原件- 发件人: I-D-Announce [mailto:i-d-announce-boun...@ietf.org] 代表 internet-dra...@ietf.org 发送时间: 2018年11月30日 9:22 收件人: i-d-annou...@ietf.org 主题: I-D Action: draft-wu-netmod-factory-default-02.txt A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. Title : Factory default Setting Authors : Qin Wu Balazs Lengyel Ye Niu Filename: draft-wu-netmod-factory-default-02.txt Pages : 10 Date: 2018-11-29 Abstract: This document defines a method to reset a YANG datastore to its factory-default content. The reset operation may be used e.g. during initial zero-touch configuration or when the existing configuration has major errors, so re-starting the configuration process from scratch is the best option. A new reset-datastore RPC is defined. Several methods of documenting the factory-default content are specified. Optionally a new "factory-default-running" read-only datastore is defined, that contains the data that will be copied over to the running datastore at reset. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-wu-netmod-factory-default/ There are also htmlized versions available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wu-netmod-factory-default-02 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-wu-netmod-factory-default-02 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-wu-netmod-factory-default-02 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/ ___ I-D-Announce mailing list i-d-annou...@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt ___ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
Re: [netmod] for a future rfc6991bis
On 29/11/2018 16:34, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
Rob,
I have added this to my list of things to look at. Whether we do this
or not may also depend on how the final date solution will look like
and whether people feel it is worth to move this out of rfc6991bis,
i.e., such a YANG revision-identifer is useful for modules that do
not want to depend on rfc6991bis.
Thanks. Sounds sensible to me.
Rob
/js
On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 11:03:45AM +, Robert Wilton wrote:
Hi Juergen,
YANG library currently defines the type "revision-identifer". Is this a
typedef that should logically migrate to rfc6991bis?
Thanks,
Rob
On 14/11/2018 08:16, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
On Wed, 2018-11-14 at 09:10 +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
Hi,
Alex Campbell wrote:
Does a percentage really need a single standard type in the first
place? How about "units percent;"?
At this point, after hearing about how different modules have
differing requirement on this type, I tend to agree.
+1
Or even "units %;"
Lada
/martin
From: netmod on behalf of Acee Lindem (acee)
Sent: Wednesday, 14 November 2018 5:03 a.m.
To: Juergen Schoenwaelder; Balázs Lengyel
Cc: NETMOD WG
Subject: Re: [netmod] for a future rfc6991bis
On 11/13/18, 9:07 AM, "netmod on behalf of Juergen Schoenwaelder"
wrote:
On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 01:33:01PM +, Balázs Lengyel wrote:
> Hello,
>
> In some cases I want a percentage without fractions. This could be
> defined
> using range, by specifying the numbers 0 | 1 | 2 ... 99 | 100 in the
> range's
> argument.
>
> typedef percent-short {
> type percent { range 0 | 1 | 2 ... 99 | 100; } // didn't type
out
> all the 101 integer values :-)
> }
>
I guess we need to settle on a small number of percentage types that
people find useful and then module authors hopefully find what they
need. I am not sure that listing 101 numbers is a good pattern to use
(although it does achieve what you want). For percentages that have no
fraction, you likely want to derive from a base type that is efficient
to encode for binary encodings such as CBOR.
Or simply define a type with a base type of unit8 type and a range of
0-100.
Acee
/js
--
Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
Fax: +49 421 200 3103
Re: [netmod] for a future rfc6991bis
Rob,
I have added this to my list of things to look at. Whether we do this
or not may also depend on how the final date solution will look like
and whether people feel it is worth to move this out of rfc6991bis,
i.e., such a YANG revision-identifer is useful for modules that do
not want to depend on rfc6991bis.
/js
On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 11:03:45AM +, Robert Wilton wrote:
> Hi Juergen,
>
> YANG library currently defines the type "revision-identifer". Is this a
> typedef that should logically migrate to rfc6991bis?
>
> Thanks,
> Rob
>
> On 14/11/2018 08:16, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> > On Wed, 2018-11-14 at 09:10 +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Alex Campbell wrote:
> > > > Does a percentage really need a single standard type in the first
> > > > place? How about "units percent;"?
> > > At this point, after hearing about how different modules have
> > > differing requirement on this type, I tend to agree.
> > +1
> >
> > Or even "units %;"
> >
> > Lada
> >
> > >
> > > /martin
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > From: netmod on behalf of Acee Lindem (acee)
> > > >
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, 14 November 2018 5:03 a.m.
> > > > To: Juergen Schoenwaelder; Balázs Lengyel
> > > > Cc: NETMOD WG
> > > > Subject: Re: [netmod] for a future rfc6991bis
> > > >
> > > > On 11/13/18, 9:07 AM, "netmod on behalf of Juergen Schoenwaelder"
> > > > > > > j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 01:33:01PM +, Balázs Lengyel wrote:
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > >
> > > > > In some cases I want a percentage without fractions. This could
> > > > be
> > > > > defined
> > > > > using range, by specifying the numbers 0 | 1 | 2 ... 99 | 100 in
> > > > the
> > > > > range's
> > > > > argument.
> > > > >
> > > > > typedef percent-short {
> > > > > type percent { range 0 | 1 | 2 ... 99 | 100; } // didn't
> > > > type
> > > > out
> > > > > all the 101 integer values :-)
> > > > > }
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > I guess we need to settle on a small number of percentage types
> > > > that
> > > > people find useful and then module authors hopefully find what they
> > > > need. I am not sure that listing 101 numbers is a good pattern to
> > > > use
> > > > (although it does achieve what you want). For percentages that
> > > > have no
> > > > fraction, you likely want to derive from a base type that is
> > > > efficient
> > > > to encode for binary encodings such as CBOR.
> > > >
> > > > Or simply define a type with a base type of unit8 type and a range of
> > > > 0-100.
> > > >
> > > > Acee
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > /js
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
> > > > Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen |
> > > > Germany
> > > > Fax: +49 421 200 3103
Re: [netmod] for a future rfc6991bis
Hi Juergen,
YANG library currently defines the type "revision-identifer". Is this a
typedef that should logically migrate to rfc6991bis?
Thanks,
Rob
On 14/11/2018 08:16, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
On Wed, 2018-11-14 at 09:10 +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
Hi,
Alex Campbell wrote:
Does a percentage really need a single standard type in the first
place? How about "units percent;"?
At this point, after hearing about how different modules have
differing requirement on this type, I tend to agree.
+1
Or even "units %;"
Lada
/martin
From: netmod on behalf of Acee Lindem (acee)
Sent: Wednesday, 14 November 2018 5:03 a.m.
To: Juergen Schoenwaelder; Balázs Lengyel
Cc: NETMOD WG
Subject: Re: [netmod] for a future rfc6991bis
On 11/13/18, 9:07 AM, "netmod on behalf of Juergen Schoenwaelder"
wrote:
On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 01:33:01PM +, Balázs Lengyel wrote:
> Hello,
>
> In some cases I want a percentage without fractions. This could be
> defined
> using range, by specifying the numbers 0 | 1 | 2 ... 99 | 100 in the
> range's
> argument.
>
> typedef percent-short {
> type percent { range 0 | 1 | 2 ... 99 | 100; } // didn't type
out
> all the 101 integer values :-)
> }
>
I guess we need to settle on a small number of percentage types that
people find useful and then module authors hopefully find what they
need. I am not sure that listing 101 numbers is a good pattern to use
(although it does achieve what you want). For percentages that have no
fraction, you likely want to derive from a base type that is efficient
to encode for binary encodings such as CBOR.
Or simply define a type with a base type of unit8 type and a range of
0-100.
Acee
/js
--
Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
Fax: +49 421 200 3103
