[netmod] FW: New YANG PubSub drafts for NETCONF, RESTCONF, HTTP/2

Forwarding to NETMOD as people might be interested... From: Eric Voit, October 13, 2015 11:37 PM There are a couple new drafts posted in NETCONF: (1) Subscribing to YANG datastore push updates http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-clemm-netconf-yang-push-02.txt As per earlier NETCONF

Re: [netmod] opstate-reqs #6: clarify impact of synchronous vs asynchronous (esp. wrt intended and applied)

On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 09:42:37PM +0100, Robert Wilton wrote: > Hi Juergen, > > On 06/10/2015 17:16, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > >On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 02:59:29PM +0100, Robert Wilton wrote: > >>Hi Kent, > >> > >>Feeding in the various input, I think that this is the best refinement >

Re: [netmod] opstate-reqs #6: clarify impact of synchronous vs asynchronous (esp. wrt intended and applied)

On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 02:25:32PM -0700, Andy Bierman wrote: > >> What does "SHOULD ensure that the request is valid" mean? RFC 6020 > >> says: > >> > >> When datastore processing is complete, the final contents MUST obey > >> all validation constraints. This validation processing is

[netmod] review of draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis-07 (section 9. built-in types)

Hi, here is the review of section 9 or draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis-07; I have finish now a complete review of the document. The most important bug I spotted is likely that section 9.4.6 is empty. /js * p126 OLD Some types have a lexical representation that depends on the XML

Re: [netmod] 6020bis extensions

On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 11:45:30AM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > David Reid writes: > > > section 6.3.1 states: > > > >If a YANG compiler does not support a particular extension, which > >appears in a YANG module as an unknown-statement (see Section 14), > >the

Re: [netmod] 6020bis extensions

Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 11:45:30AM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > > David Reid writes: > > > > > section 6.3.1 states: > > > > > >If a YANG compiler does not support a particular extension, which > > >

Re: [netmod] 6020bis extensions

On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 12:30:58PM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > > > On 13 Oct 2015, at 12:19, Juergen Schoenwaelder > > wrote: > > > > On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 11:45:30AM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > >> David Reid writes: > >> > >>>

Re: [netmod] Yang 1.0/1.1 ABNF Grammar:

Robert Wilton je 13.10.2015 ob 12:01 napisal: Hi, I was looking the Yang 1.1 ABNF Grammar, and noticed various places where the rules are specified as the directive "a string that matches the rule XXX", e.g. yang-version-arg-str = < a string that matches the rule

Re: [netmod] Yang 1.0/1.1 ABNF Grammar:

Hi Jernej, Thanks for the explanation, that along with looking at section 6.1.2/6.1.3 makes this clear. Cheers, Rob On 13/10/2015 11:07, Jernej Tuljak wrote: Robert Wilton je 13.10.2015 ob 12:01 napisal: Hi, I was looking the Yang 1.1 ABNF Grammar, and noticed various places where the

Re: [netmod] Yang 1.0/1.1 ABNF Grammar:

Robert Wilton wrote: > Hi, > > I was looking the Yang 1.1 ABNF Grammar, and noticed various places > where the rules are specified as the directive "a string that matches > the rule XXX", e.g. > >yang-version-arg-str = < a string that matches the rule >

Re: [netmod] 6020bis extensions

> On 13 Oct 2015, at 12:19, Juergen Schoenwaelder > wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 11:45:30AM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: >> David Reid writes: >> >>> section 6.3.1 states: >>> >>> If a YANG compiler does not support a particular

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-netmod-yang-metadata-02 (until 2015-10-22)

On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 05:37:36PM +, Kent Watsen wrote: > > This is a notice to start a NETMOD WG last call for the document: > > Defining and Using Metadata with YANG > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netmod-yang-metadata-02 > > Please indicate your support by Thursday October 22,

Re: [netmod] 6020bis extensions

David Reid writes: > section 6.3.1 states: > >If a YANG compiler does not support a particular extension, which >appears in a YANG module as an unknown-statement (see Section 14), >the entire unknown-statement MAY be ignored by the compiler. > >If a YANG parser

[netmod] Yang 1.0/1.1 ABNF Grammar:

Hi, I was looking the Yang 1.1 ABNF Grammar, and noticed various places where the rules are specified as the directive "a string that matches the rule XXX", e.g. yang-version-arg-str = < a string that matches the rule yang-version-arg > yang-version-arg=

Re: [netmod] opstate-reqs issue #1 - Define/Clarify "fully synchronized" in "Requirement 1.D"

In an attempt to try and close on some of the proposed requirement text before Thursday's interim meeting. Does anyone have any outstanding objections on using this proposed text for Requirement 1.D, or is it sufficiently clear to update the draft, and resolve issue 1? OLD text for

Re: [netmod] opstate-reqs #5: Support for situations when structure of intended configuration is not the same as applied

From the interim meeting two weeks ago, it was clarified that the schema of the intended configuration nodes are expected to be the same as the schema of the applied configuration nodes so that clients can easily relate between the two. I think that the requirement text for 1.C and the

[netmod] nested choices

Hi, my action item from yesterday's interim was to check whether some updates to 6020bis are needed in order to address the corner cases presented by Balazs: - https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/i73sR0_d9UkshMuhxiCDOSZWhqk -

Re: [netmod] Order of evaluation for when?

Hello Martin, I agree that A1 is what follows the spirit of YANG, but then IMHO you should change/correct 8.2.1 in YANG because that implies A2 and error. regards Balazs On 2015-10-13 13:30, Martin Bjorklund wrote: Balazs Lengyel wrote: Hello Martin, If I had a

Re: [netmod] opstate-reqs #6: clarify impact of synchronous vs asynchronous (esp. wrt intended and applied)

Hi, On 13/10/2015 09:48, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 09:42:37PM +0100, Robert Wilton wrote: Hi Juergen, On 06/10/2015 17:16, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 02:59:29PM +0100, Robert Wilton wrote: Hi Kent, Feeding in the various input, I think

Re: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis-07.txt

Hi, As discussed in the meeting yesterday, here is the proposed text to cover the when context node and accessible tree issue: Changed text in 7.25.1: The XPath expression is conceptually evaluated in the following context, in addition to the definition in Section 6.4.1: o If the

Re: [netmod] 6020bis extensions

> On 13 Oct 2015, at 12:42, Juergen Schoenwaelder > wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 12:30:58PM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: >> >>> On 13 Oct 2015, at 12:19, Juergen Schoenwaelder >>> wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, Oct

Re: [netmod] review of draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis-07 (except 9. built-in types)

Juergen Schoenwaelder writes: > Hi, > > I have read through draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis-07 (except section 9. > Built-In Types). Overall, the document is in a good shape. I spotted a > number of editorial issues or a number of issues where we could try to >

Re: [netmod] rib-data-model and routing-cfg

Hi Lada, NETMOD, So I think we should move forward this ietf-rtg-cfg so that it can be augmented and other work can move forward. We are still in disagreement with respect to routing-instance/interface configuration. - We feel the IPv4/IPv6 interfaces should reference the routing-instance

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-netmod-yang-metadata-02 (until 2015-10-22)

On 10/07/2015 07:37 PM, Kent Watsen wrote: This is a notice to start a NETMOD WG last call for the document: Defining and Using Metadata with YANG http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netmod-yang-metadata-02 I have read the document, and coming in without the previous discussions,

[netmod] 6020bis - sec. 5.6.4 comments

Hi, regarding $subj: - What about extensions? Do modules defining them have to be implemented? That is, is "default-revision" true or false for such modules? - Third paragraph: OLD This is regardless of if module B is imported by revision or not. NEW If module B is imported by

Re: [netmod] rib-data-model and routing-cfg

> On 13 Oct 2015, at 17:20, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote: > > Hi Lada, NETMOD, > > So I think we should move forward this ietf-rtg-cfg so that it can be > augmented and other work can move forward. We are still in disagreement > with respect to routing-instance/interface

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-netmod-yang-metadata-02 (until 2015-10-22)

Hi Robert, > On 13 Oct 2015, at 17:26, Robert Varga wrote: > > On 10/07/2015 07:37 PM, Kent Watsen wrote: >> >> This is a notice to start a NETMOD WG last call for the document: >> >> Defining and Using Metadata with YANG >>

Re: [netmod] 6020bis extensions

> On 13 Oct 2015, at 18:19, Andy Bierman wrote: > > > > On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 5:40 AM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > > > On 13 Oct 2015, at 12:42, Juergen Schoenwaelder > > wrote: > > > > On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at

Re: [netmod] 6020bis extensions

On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 9:42 AM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > > > On 13 Oct 2015, at 18:19, Andy Bierman wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 5:40 AM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > > > > > On 13 Oct 2015, at 12:42, Juergen Schoenwaelder < >

Re: [netmod] 6020bis more than one revision of a module

On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 12:55:32PM -0700, Randy Presuhn wrote: > Hi - > > >From: David Reid > >Sent: Oct 9, 2015 2:03 PM > >To: netmod@ietf.org > >Subject: [netmod] 6020bis more than one revision of a module > > > >I'm reviewing 6020bis since it is in working group last call. >

Re: [netmod] opstate-reqs #6: clarify impact of synchronous vs asynchronous (esp. wrt intended and applied)

On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 01:59:52PM +0100, Robert Wilton wrote: > >As said before, an OS kernel usually does not track where resource > >parameters were coming from. (An interface has a set of IP addresses > >and the kernel usually does not know which addresses were coming from > >a configuration

Re: [netmod] 6020bis more than one revision of a module

Hi - >From: David Reid >Sent: Oct 9, 2015 2:03 PM >To: netmod@ietf.org >Subject: [netmod] 6020bis more than one revision of a module > >I'm reviewing 6020bis since it is in working group last call. >I see a new requirement that a server MUST NOT implement >more than one revision

Re: [netmod] 6020bis more than one revision of a module

Hi - >From: Juergen Schoenwaelder >Sent: Oct 13, 2015 1:06 PM >To: Randy Presuhn >Cc: netmod@ietf.org >Subject: Re: [netmod] 6020bis more than one revision of a module > >On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 12:55:32PM -0700, Randy Presuhn

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-netmod-yang-metadata-02 (until 2015-10-22)

On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 03:09:34PM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > > > On 13 Oct 2015, at 13:01, Juergen Schoenwaelder > > wrote: > > > > On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 05:37:36PM +, Kent Watsen wrote: > >> > >> This is a notice to start a NETMOD WG last

Re: [netmod] 6020bis extensions

On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 5:40 AM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > > > On 13 Oct 2015, at 12:42, Juergen Schoenwaelder < > j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 12:30:58PM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > >> > >>> On 13 Oct 2015, at 12:19, Juergen

Re: [netmod] 6020bis more than one revision of a module

On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Randy Presuhn wrote: > Hi - > > >From: Juergen Schoenwaelder > >Sent: Oct 13, 2015 1:06 PM > >To: Randy Presuhn > >Cc: netmod@ietf.org > >Subject: Re: [netmod]

Re: [netmod] opstate-reqs #6: clarify impact of synchronous vs asynchronous (esp. wrt intended and applied)

On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 12:13 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder < j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 01:59:52PM +0100, Robert Wilton wrote: > > >As said before, an OS kernel usually does not track where resource > > >parameters were coming from. (An interface has a set

[netmod] Tunnel Design Philosophy

Hi, RTGWGer and NETMODer: Here I want to ask for advices from any expert that is familiar with the usages and designs of various tunnel technologies that are wide deployed within the network. What is the principle and philosophy about the design of Yang Model for these tunnel technologies?