Re: [netmod] derived-from-or-self leads to circular import

2016-08-01 Thread Rob Shakir
> On Jul 29, 2016, at 07:32, Juergen Schoenwaelder > wrote: > > I think moving the definition of entity-physical-class into > iana-entity makes sense. Perhaps this is generally a good pattern to > follow for base identities for which IANA maintains derived > identities. The required import sho

Re: [netmod] OpsState Direction Impact on Recommended IETF YANG Model Structure

2016-08-01 Thread Kent Watsen
Following Lou’s recommendation, my proposed changes for rfc6087bis Section 5.23 follow: 5.23. Operational Data In YANG, any data that has a "config" statement value of "false" could be considered operational data. The relationship between configuration (i.e., "config" statement has

Re: [netmod] YANG 1.1: XML naming restriction

2016-08-01 Thread Phil Shafer
Ladislav Lhotka writes: >If it is still possible, it would IMO make a good sense to remove that comment >from the >ABNF in 6020bis, and make this change in sec. 7.1.4: > >OLD > > A prefix is an identifier (see Section 6.2). > >NEW > > A prefix is an identifier (see Section 6.2), and it MUST N

[netmod] exchange of messages between the OPS Area and IEEE 802.1 on VLAN YANG models

2016-08-01 Thread Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
Hi, On 7/21 Benoit Claise (OPS AD) sent a message to the IEEE 802.1 WG concerning the VLAN YANG models work in the IETF METMOD WG. The IEEE 802.1 WG which met in a plenary meeting last week discussed and responded. The response and the initial mail are posted at http://www.ieee802.org/1/files/

Re: [netmod] Design-Time schema mount

2016-08-01 Thread Ladislav Lhotka
> On 01 Aug 2016, at 16:09, Andy Bierman wrote: > > > > On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 6:45 AM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > Balazs Lengyel writes: > > > Hello, > > > > As I understood Andy, it was already agreed that if you advertise > > support for a model that defines extensions you MUST support tho

Re: [netmod] YANG 1.1: XML naming restriction

2016-08-01 Thread Dale R. Worley
William Lupton writes: > But the errata at https://www.w3.org/XML/xml-V10-5e-errata > say the following. There > are also related changes to Section 2.6 (processing instructions) and > Section 3 (logical structures). >> Section 2.3 Common Syntactic Const

Re: [netmod] Design-Time schema mount

2016-08-01 Thread Andy Bierman
On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 6:45 AM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > Balazs Lengyel writes: > > > Hello, > > > > As I understood Andy, it was already agreed that if you advertise > > support for a model that defines extensions you MUST support those > > extensions. So you effectively advertise support for t

Re: [netmod] Design-Time schema mount

2016-08-01 Thread Ladislav Lhotka
Balazs Lengyel writes: > Hello, > > As I understood Andy, it was already agreed that if you advertise > support for a model that defines extensions you MUST support those > extensions. So you effectively advertise support for those extensions. OK, so let's say a server advertises "ietf-system"

Re: [netmod] BBF extensions to ietf-entity

2016-08-01 Thread Juergen Schoenwaelder
On Mon, Aug 01, 2016 at 10:48:01AM +0100, William Lupton wrote: > Sorry, I was talking only about the interface _stack_ configuration. Ref RFC > 7223 Section 3.3: > > While the interface layering is configured in interface-type-specific models, > two generic state data leaf-lists, "higher-layer-

Re: [netmod] BBF extensions to ietf-entity

2016-08-01 Thread William Lupton
Sorry, I was talking only about the interface _stack_ configuration. Ref RFC 7223 Section 3.3: While the interface layering is configured in interface-type-specific models, two generic state data leaf-lists, "higher-layer-if” and "lower-layer-if", represent a read-only view of the interface lay

Re: [netmod] BBF extensions to ietf-entity

2016-08-01 Thread Juergen Schoenwaelder
On Mon, Aug 01, 2016 at 10:13:38AM +0100, William Lupton wrote: > > There seems to be an analogy with interfaces here. The ietf-interfaces module > provides only a read-only view of the interface stack, and interface > type-specific modules are expected to provide a means of configuring the > s

Re: [netmod] BBF extensions to ietf-entity

2016-08-01 Thread Bogaert, Bart (Nokia - BE)
William, Not sure how this can be done in all cases. Assume we have a box that allows ‘n’ boards to be plugged in slots 1..n. During pre-provisioning we configure 2 boards of the same type, one in slot 1 and another in slot 2. We also pre-provision the ports and allocate subscriber interf

Re: [netmod] BBF extensions to ietf-entity

2016-08-01 Thread William Lupton
Maybe configuration of the entity tree for pluggable items should be handled via augmentations that are specific to pluggable items? There seems to be an analogy with interfaces here. The ietf-interfaces module provides only a read-only view of the interface stack, and interface type-specific m

Re: [netmod] YANG 1.1: XML naming restriction

2016-08-01 Thread Ladislav Lhotka
> On 01 Aug 2016, at 10:15, William Lupton wrote: > > But the errata at https://www.w3.org/XML/xml-V10-5e-errata say the following. > There are also related changes to Section 2.6 (processing instructions) and > Section 3 (logical structures). W. > Section 2.3 Common Syntactic Constructs > Del

Re: [netmod] YANG 1.1: XML naming restriction

2016-08-01 Thread William Lupton
But the errata at https://www.w3.org/XML/xml-V10-5e-errata say the following. There are also related changes to Section 2.6 (processing instructions) and Section 3 (logical structures). W. Section 2.3 Common Syntactic Constructs