Re: [netmod] List name: singular or plural?

I agree. I am actually surprised to not see it in RFC 8407. This is a very useful "best practice" as a design pattern. (I think there are other useful patterns worth describing as well, such as concerning when to use groupings or choices or identities, with the last one in particular in my ex

Re: [netmod] [netconf] ietf-subscribed-notifications RPC modify-subscription

--Original Message- From: Michal Vaško Sent: Tuesday, August 3, 2021 11:17 PM To: Alexander Clemm Cc: Mahesh Jethanandani ; Netconf ; netmod Subject: Re: [netconf] [netmod] ietf-subscribed-notifications RPC modify-subscription Hi Alex, thanks for the reply and I see that I should have inc

Re: [netmod] ietf-subscribed-notifications RPC modify-subscription

be augmented, and RFC 8641 specifies a second case, namely "datastore". --- Alex From: netmod On Behalf Of Alexander Clemm Sent: Tuesday, August 3, 2021 11:21 AM To: Mahesh Jethanandani ; Netconf Cc: netmod Subject: Re: [netmod] ietf-subscribed-notifications RPC modify-subscription

Re: [netmod] ietf-subscribed-notifications RPC modify-subscription

Hi, When you modify the subscription, you need to specify the subscription parameters that you want to modify the subscription to - i.e. the subscription parameters that you want to be in effect after modifying the subscription. If you want nothing to be filtered, just specify a "null" filter.

Re: [netmod] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-netmod-nmda-diff-09

Hello Shetha, Thank you for your review. To the open question to the authors, adding to Andy’s repsonse: The monitoring of resources consumed by requests, measuring the rate of requests etc is deemed to go beyond the scope of this Internet Draft. The ability to monitor such aspects is i

Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-wwx-netmod-event-yang-10

Hi all, First of all, happy New Year! My 2 cents: I can see that ECAs can be a slippery slope that can lead to significant complexity when not careful. That said, I do think there is value in simple automation on the device, things like TCAs etc, and (looking back at history) RMON and event M

Re: [netmod] Regarding IPR on draft-wwx-netmod-event-yang-10

As a contributor: No, I'm not aware of any IPR that applies to this draft Cheers --- Alex From: netmod On Behalf Of Igor Bryskin Sent: Monday, December 7, 2020 3:02 PM To: Qin Wu ; Henk Birkholz ; Xufeng Liu ; Benoit Claise ; Lou Berger Cc: NetMod WG Chairs ; NetMod WG Subject: Re: [netmod] R

Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-wwx-netmod-event-yang-10

I support adoption (as a contributor). --- Alex -Original Message- From: netmod On Behalf Of Lou Berger Sent: Monday, December 7, 2020 2:33 PM To: NETMOD Group Cc: NetMod WG Chairs Subject: Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-wwx-netmod-event-yang-10 I should have mentioned that this

Re: [netmod] [yang-doctors] Yangdoctors last call review of draft-ietf-netmod-nmda-diff-04

Thanks, Reshad and Yingzhen! --- Alex From: netmod On Behalf Of Reshad Rahman (rrahman) Sent: Friday, September 25, 2020 9:42 AM To: Yingzhen Qu ; Alexander L Clemm ; yang-doct...@ietf.org Cc: last-c...@ietf.org; draft-ietf-netmod-nmda-diff@ietf.org; netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] [y

Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-wwx-netmod-event-yang

Hi Igor, quick responses inline. I think we are by and large on the same page. --- Alex From: Igor Bryskin Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2020 6:30 AM To: Alexander Clemm ; Andy Bierman Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-wwx-netmod-event-yang Hi Andy, Jurgen, Alex

Re: [netmod] WGLC - Comparison of NMDA datastores - draft-ietf-netmod-nmda-diff-03

Hi Martin, thank you for your comments! Please see replies inline, --- Alex > -Original Message- > From: netmod On Behalf Of Martin Bjorklund > Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2020 8:59 AM > To: joe...@bogus.com > Cc: netmod-cha...@ietf.org; netmod@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [netmod] WGLC -

Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-wwx-netmod-event-yang

occurs before WG adoption or afterwards. --- Alex From: Tianran Zhou Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2020 4:44 PM To: Alexander Clemm ; Joel Jaeggli ; netmod@ietf.org Subject: RE: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-wwx-netmod-event-yang Hi the authors, >“Another one to allow the definition of cus

Re: [netmod] WGLC - Comparison of NMDA datastores - draft-ietf-netmod-nmda-diff-03

Hi Juergen, thank you for your comments! Please find replies inline, --- Alex > -Original Message- > From: netmod On Behalf Of Schönwälder, Jürgen > Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2020 8:57 AM > To: Joel Jaeggli > Cc: netmod-cha...@ietf.org; netmod@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [netmod] WGL

Re: [netmod] draft-ietf-netmod-nmda-diff - IPR verfication request

Yes, the IPR has been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules. (Back in 2017; see datatracker) --- Alex > -Original Message- > From: netmod On Behalf Of Joel Jaeggli > Sent: Monday, February 17, 2020 11:45 AM > To: draft-ietf-netmod-nmda-d...@ietf.org; netmod@ietf.org > Subject: [ne

Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-wwx-netmod-event-yang

Hi, I support this draft and would like to see netmod work on this, but I do think some aspects need more maturing and parts of this probably should be rescoped. Should the draft be adopted now, or should it be improved first and adopted later? Not sure. I would like to see the work continue

Re: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-nmda-diff-03.txt

f-netmod-nmda-diff-03.txt > > > 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 : Comparison of NMDA datastores &

Re: [netmod] Performance considerations for draft-ietf-netmod-nmda-diff

Hi Tim, this aspect is currently mentioned in the security considerations, specifically the last paragraph (https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netmod-nmda-diff-02#page-14), mentioning the fact that comparing datastores for differences requires a certain amount of processing resources, whic

Re: [netmod] New Version Notification for draft-ietf-netmod-nmda-diff-01.txt

ms from the adoption-poll, the 103 meeting minutes, and the emails Andy and Juergen sent on Nov 6. PS: as a contributor, the update seems incomplete without an example illustrating the new 'source-value' element. Kent   // chair On May 22, 2019, at 12:24 AM, Alexander Clemm <mail

[netmod] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-netmod-nmda-diff-01.txt

Forwarded Message Subject:New Version Notification for draft-ietf-netmod-nmda-diff-01.txt Date: Tue, 21 May 2019 21:15:58 -0700 From: internet-dra...@ietf.org To: Andy Bierman , Yingzhen Qu , Alexander Clemm , Jeff Tantsura A new version of I-D, draft-ietf-netmod-nmda-diff-01

Re: [netmod] WG adoption poll for draft-clemm-netmod-nmda-diff-00

Thank you - we will submit it shortly. Looking forward to discussions in Bangkok --- Alex > -Original Message- > From: netmod [mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Kent Watsen > Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2018 1:43 PM > To: netmod@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [netmod] WG adoption poll

Re: [netmod] WG adoption poll for draft-clemm-netmod-nmda-diff-00

seems to be one of the technical details that need to be decided, not something that would make or break support as a whole? --- Alex > -Original Message- > From: Kent Watsen [mailto:kwat...@juniper.net] > Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2018 10:17 AM > To: Alexander Clemm ; Lad

Re: [netmod] WG adoption poll for draft-clemm-netmod-nmda-diff-00

I would second the request for one format (which is mandatory to support), which must be specified. YANG-Patch is the logical candidate IMHO. To allow selection of other formats using an input parameter makes sense, but adds some complexity from there: How to know which formats are supported

Re: [netmod] WG adoption poll

Support --- Alex > -Original Message- > From: netmod [mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Lou Berger > Sent: Monday, October 08, 2018 4:39 AM > To: NetMod WG > Cc: NetMod WG Chairs > Subject: [netmod] WG adoption poll > > All, > > This is start of a two week poll on making > d

Re: [netmod] WG adoption poll for draft-clemm-netmod-nmda-diff-00

Support as coauthor --- Alex > -Original Message- > From: netmod [mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Kent Watsen > Sent: Monday, October 01, 2018 2:48 PM > To: netmod@ietf.org > Subject: [netmod] WG adoption poll for draft-clemm-netmod-nmda-diff-00 > > The IETF 102 in-room poll

Re: [netmod] IPR poll on draft-clemm-netmod-nmda-diff-00

Kent, same here. I am not aware of any IPR that has not been disclosed. (I am aware of the IPR that was disclosed a year ago and that is on datatracker.) --- Alex From: netmod [mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jeff Tantsura Sent: Monday, October 01, 2018 4:07 PM To: netmod@ietf.org;

Re: [netmod] Thoughts on draft-clemm-netmod-nmda-diff

Hello Qin, quick responses inline, --- Alex > -Original Message- > From: netmod [mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Qin Wu > Sent: Friday, July 20, 2018 8:26 AM > To: Joe Clarke ; netmod@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [netmod] Thoughts on draft-clemm-netmod-nmda-diff > > Add two add

Re: [netmod] Thoughts on draft-clemm-netmod-nmda-diff

Hi Joe, regarding the "who" made the change and when: I would think it makes sense to have the ability to include this information if it were available (analogous to how origin metadata can be included). However, I don't think this is captured today. This would be a candidate to add as part

Re: [netmod] Smart filters for YANG-Push

Hi Balazs, thank you for your suggestion! Brief responses inline. --- Alex From: Balazs Lengyel [mailto:balazs.leng...@ericsson.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2018 8:54 AM To: Alexander Clemm ; netmod@ietf.org Cc: netmod-cha...@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] Smart filters for YANG-Push Hello

[netmod] Smart filters for YANG-Push

Hello Netmod Working Group, we have just submitted a new draft on Smart Filters for Push Updates: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-clemm-netmod-push-smart-filters-00 This draft supersedes draft-clemm-netconf-push-smart-filters-ps that recently expired. The draft involves the definition of a

Re: [netmod] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-lengyel-netmod-yang-instance-data-01.txt

Hi Balazs, I think the problem that this addresses is valid and having an interoperable solution for this makes sense. (The server capabilities is still underspecified, but is straightforward to add.) So, I will be happy to support this. --- Alex From: netmod [mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org]

Re: [netmod] [Netconf] LC on YANG Library (bis)

e happy to contribute if someone wants to take the lead). --- Alex > -Original Message- > From: Kent Watsen [mailto:kwat...@juniper.net] > Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2018 7:51 AM > To: Alexander Clemm ; Juergen > Schoenwaelder > Cc: NETCONF WG ; NETMOD WG > Subject: Re

Re: [netmod] [Netconf] LC on YANG Library (bis)

, it is always possible to write another draft or do a bisbis. Cheers --- Alex > -Original Message- > From: Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de] > Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2018 12:29 PM > To: Alexander Clemm > Cc: Mahesh Jethananda

Re: [netmod] [Netconf] LC on YANG Library (bis)

rom: Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de] > Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2018 11:48 AM > To: Alexander Clemm > Cc: Mahesh Jethanandani ; NETCONF WG > ; NETMOD WG > Subject: Re: [netmod] [Netconf] LC on YANG Library (bis) > > Alexander, > > I disagree. T

Re: [netmod] [Netconf] LC on YANG Library (bis)

Hi, I have taken a look at this document. My main comment is that one aspect that is missing, that I believe should be added, concerns the inclusion of certain metadata about the modules. Specifically, in the context of YANG-Push we had a discussion about being able to mark nodes that are not

Re: [netmod] yang-push issue: draft-ietf-netconf-yang-push-12 and default values and RFC 6243

Thanks, Rob and Juergen, for pointing this out! I guess we should add this to the text as well. --- Alex From: Robert Wilton [mailto:rwil...@cisco.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2018 2:43 PM To: Alexander Clemm ; Einar Nilsen-Nygaard (einarnn) ; netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] yang

Re: [netmod] yang-push issue: draft-ietf-netconf-yang-push-12 and default values and RFC 6243

Hi Einar, I suggest we add clarification that default values must be reported. For on-change, clearly all changes need to be reported, whether the change is to a default value or not, everything else would be confusing. Also for periodic, it would be confusing to leave out readings when a val

Re: [netmod] WGLC - draft-ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams

+1 to (2) as preference, followed by (1). I don't think (3) is needed here. The purpose is to make this human-readable and provide readers a good sense of the overall structure. The authoritative specification is still the .yang itself. Providing some guidance for how to represent the tree i

Re: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model-19.txt

IMHO, if this module is supposed to be useful in practice, without requiring immediately proprietary augmentations, UDP needs to be supported. RFC 5424 also states that implementations SHOULD support a UDP transport per RFC 5426. Whether TCP support should be included is debatable because not

Re: [netmod] Augmentation to Groupings

IMHO it would be worth a try. If you wanted to only augment _some_ uses of a grouping, you could still do the same as today. Also, I would expect augmentations to only affect servers that support the module defining the augmentation. If verbosity were not an issue, why were groupings introduc

Re: [netmod] Augmentation to Groupings

+1 I would like to see such a capability as well. As mentioned, specifically when groupings are used in multiple places, augmentation becomes really unwieldy without an option to simply augment the grouping instead. It also gets harder to read; to some degree it negates the benefits from ntro

Re: [netmod] [Netconf] Summary and AIs from IETF-100 meeting

Hi, One other action / question concerns WG adoption of draft-clemm-netconf-nmda-diff-01 (Discrepancy detection between NMDA datastores). The draft received considerable support when the question was asked in the room, but one que

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

Thanks, Rob --- Alex From: Robert Wilton [mailto:rwil...@cisco.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2017 4:43 AM To: Alexander Clemm ; Martin Bjorklund ; a...@yumaworks.com; netmod@ietf.org; Randy Presuhn ; Phil Shafer Subject: Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements Hi Alex, On 31/10/2017 17

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

> -Original Message- ... > > That is an interesting question. > > > > To describe this as a concrete example, if you have a single config > > true YANG list for dynamic/configuration subscriptions then a > > subscription can be created either via configuration or as an RPC operation. > > >

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

Hi Rob, A few comments, inline --- Alex From: netmod [mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Robert Wilton Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2017 7:14 AM To: Martin Bjorklund ; a...@yumaworks.com; netmod@ietf.org; Randy Presuhn Subject: Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements Hi, Here is anot

Re: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams-02.txt

I would find an option to show "uses" very useful, instead of always having to expand groupings. Depending on the groupings and the amount of groupings reuse it can cut down complexity of trees substantially and directs focus to the forest, not the trees - really ultimately the intent of this.

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis-14

Hi Kent Two quick replies, inline, Thanks --- Alex > -Original Message- > From: netmod [mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Kent Watsen > Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 11:30 AM > To: Alexander Clemm ; netmod@ietf.org > Cc: netmod-cha...@ietf.org; draft-ietf

Re: [netmod] draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis as a BCP?

Intuitively, BCP seems the right choice to me. Also, I think it is fine to issue an RFC now even if it is clear it will need updating later. IETF really needs to get better at releasing documents faster, it’s not as if there is a shortage of integers and potential churn is at this point less o

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis-14

(Resending, apologies in case of duplicates) I have reviewed some parts of the draft and have just a few comments as well: - One area where guidelines are missing, but where guidance would be needed, concerns how to model return values from RPCs, as well as how to model the handling of RPC

Re: [netmod] hi Alex, Eric and design team guys some comments for YANG-push and subscribed-notifications, please help to confirm

: netmod [mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Eric Voit (evoit) Sent: Monday, May 8, 2017 9:04 AM To: Zhengguangying (Walker) ; Alexander Clemm Cc: Liubin (Nickylba) ; Zhuzhiguo (Zhuzhiguo, CSD) ; netc...@ietf.org; netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] hi Alex, Eric and design team guys some

Re: [netmod] hi Alex, Eric and design team guys some comments for YANG-push and subscribed-notifications, please help to confirm

; 'Chisholm, Sharon' ; Yangang ; Alexander Clemm ; 'Susan Hares' ; Tim Jenkins (timjenki) ; 'Scharf, Michael (Nokia - DE)' ; Rohit pobbathi ; 'MehmetErsue' ; Mahesh Jethanandani (mahesh) Subject: RE: hi Alex, Eric and design team guys some comments f

Re: [netmod] WG adoption poll draft-bjorklund-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams

I do have a question re: the rationale that is given in the document: " Today's Common practice is include the definition of the syntax used to represent a YANG module in every document that provides a tree diagram. This practice has several disadvantages and the purpose of the document is

Re: [netmod] notifications2, new draft (was RE: notifications...and yang-next)

: Ladislav Lhotka ; Juergen Schoenwaelder ; Alexander Clemm ; Andy Bierman (a...@yumaworks.com) Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: RE: [netmod] notifications2, new draft (was RE: notifications...and yang-next) Hi Lada, Juergen, Alex, Andy, In January your comments on "notifications" helped

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model-11

acceptable, frankly. --- Alex From: Kent Watsen [mailto:kwat...@juniper.net] Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2017 4:13 PM To: Alexander Clemm ; draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-mo...@ietf.org Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model-11 > > True, t

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model-11

Hi Kent More responses, --- Alex From: Kent Watsen [mailto:kwat...@juniper.net] Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2017 2:52 PM To: Alexander Clemm ; draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-mo...@ietf.org Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model-11 >> - shou

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model-11

Hi, I am no an author, but I do have an opinion regarding the signed-messages feature. IMHO, this is something that needs to be definitely included as part of the draft. Syslog signing is a part of the suite of IETF standards-track RFCs geared towards syslog. Quite simply, I don’t think the

Re: [netmod] notifications

Hi, Per an earlier thread, it appeared to be sufficient to define a paragraph in the new RFC which "Updates: RFC 7950", with text that explains how YANG-defined notifications are encoded". I do agree that conceptually, RFC 7950 should not contain dependencies on RFC 5277; short of making updat

Re: [netmod] kw comments on draft-voit-netmod-yang-mount-requirements

sense build on top of, or extend, alias mount. --- Alex -Original Message- From: Eric Voit (evoit) Sent: Friday, April 08, 2016 6:33 AM To: Juergen Schoenwaelder Cc: Martin Bjorklund ; kwat...@juniper.net; Alexander Clemm (alex) ; netmod@ietf.org Subject: RE: [netmod] kw comments on dra

Re: [netmod] YANG model classification?

matters, it does not simplify communication. --- Alex -Original Message- From: Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de] Sent: Friday, April 08, 2016 12:08 AM To: Alexander Clemm (alex) Cc: Carl Moberg (camoberg) ; Scharf, Michael (Nokia - DE) ; netmod

Re: [netmod] YANG model classification?

berg (camoberg) Sent: Friday, April 08, 2016 9:53 AM To: Andy Bierman Cc: Alexander Clemm (alex) ; netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] YANG model classification? > On Apr 8, 2016, at 3:36 PM, Andy Bierman wrote: > > > > On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 6:18 AM, Carl Moberg (camoberg

Re: [netmod] YANG model classification?

I am wondering what purpose the classification really serves. At the end of the day, it seems to me that we are trying to express a model hierarchy, and articulate what the layers in the hierarchy are. A device model is thus at a lower layer than a service model. An implementation of the serv

Re: [netmod] kw comments on draft-voit-netmod-yang-mount-requirements

Hi, Martin, Lada, unfortunately I wasn't able to attend the discussion, but I have one comment regarding the "definition" vs "implementation" distinction. Clearly, peer-mount and alias-mount have a definition component to it. This is why the YANG extensions were defined to define mountpoints

Re: [netmod] WG adoption poll draft-bjorklund-netmod-structural-mount-02 as draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount

Support I would like to see this go in a direction where this can merge and be clearly complementary with Alias-Mount and Peer-Mount. Thanks --- Alex -Original Message- From: netmod [mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Lou Berger Sent: Monday, March 21, 2016 9:18 AM To: netmo

[netmod] FYI: New Version Notification for draft-clemm-netmod-mount-04.txt

) -Original Message- From: internet-dra...@ietf.org [mailto:internet-dra...@ietf.org] Sent: Monday, March 21, 2016 4:31 PM To: Alexander Clemm (alex) ; Eric Voit (evoit) ; Alexander Clemm (alex) ; Jan Medved (jmedved) Subject: New Version Notification for draft-clemm-netmod-mount-04.txt

Re: [netmod] Differentiating the types of Mount

Hi, I have one addition on top of Eric's response --- Alex > > Is your alias mount simply a special case of a peer mount where the > peer is local? Or is there more to it? >From a syntax standpoint, peer mount is more general. But underneath, things >get more complicated. For example, many

Re: [netmod] yang-next

How about calling it YANGNG? Cheers --- Alex From: netmod [mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Kent Watsen Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 6:13 PM To: netmod@ietf.org Subject: [netmod] yang-next All, I see too many emails go by where someone has an idea that they’d like to get into a f

Re: [netmod] explicit mount

- From: Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de] Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2016 3:17 PM To: Alexander Clemm (alex) Cc: Martin Bjorklund ; netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] explicit mount On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 09:04:00PM +, Alexander Clemm (alex) wrote: &g

Re: [netmod] explicit mount

Juergen, I think you are correct. Also alias-mount and peer-mount (not just schema-mount) specify mountpoints in the schema. They are not about mounting arbitrary data in arbitrary places, but defining a model with mountpoints declared. --- Alex -Original Message- From: netmod [mail

Re: [netmod] Yang mount / ysdl example use case

each other. --- Alex -Original Message- From: Lou Berger [mailto:lber...@labn.net] Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2016 12:48 PM To: Kent Watsen ; Robert Wilton -X (rwilton - ENSOFT LIMITED at Cisco) Cc: netmod WG ; Alexander Clemm (alex) ; Eric Voit (evoit) Subject: Re: [netmod]

Re: [netmod] Yang mount / ysdl example use case

[mailto:kwat...@juniper.net] Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2016 11:27 AM To: Robert Wilton -X (rwilton - ENSOFT LIMITED at Cisco) Cc: Lou Berger ; netmod WG ; Alexander Clemm (alex) ; Eric Voit (evoit) Subject: Re: [netmod] Yang mount / ysdl example use case I was led to believe that the current

Re: [netmod] Draft clemm netmod mount draft

Hi, this was intended as an example. The reason to include the interfaces module is the scenario in which a controller would like to have a model/inventory of the various interfaces across the network. Each network device will have its own instantiation of the interfaces module. Rather than

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

Forwarding to NETMOD as people there might be interested as well (for those subscribed to both mailers, apologies for the spam...) From: Netconf [mailto:netconf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Alexander Clemm (alex) Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2015 1:57 PM To: netc...@ietf.org Subject: Re

Re: [netmod] anydata interaction with yang-patch and edit config

Thanks, Martin, this is very clear. (Too bad actually - I could see applications for this.) --- Alex -Original Message- From: Martin Bjorklund [mailto:m...@tail-f.com] Sent: Monday, October 05, 2015 2:21 PM To: Alexander Clemm (alex) Cc: j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de; lho

[netmod] anydata interaction with yang-patch and edit config (RE: 6020bis - anydata)

Hi, I have two quick questions with regards to anydata - related to the topic of the thread, but concerning a separate topic. (1) How does yang-patch interact with anydata? In particular, could you apply a yang-patch edit to a data node within the anydata? (While the module may not have be

Re: [netmod] Motivations for Structuring Models

Hi Randy, GDMO had some very powerful concepts. The ability to separate definition hierarchy and containment hierarchy is indeed very powerful. In many ways, it was ahead of its time. The problem I see is that in the context of YANG (much simpler), I don't think the same concept of name bind

Re: [netmod] tracking new YANG language issues

FWIW, I prefer I-D as well. This is a very well established and very well understood process. One advantage is that things are very easy to find (from the documents page). Regardless which way is chosen, having the IETF datatracker page as an entry point from where to find stuff is IMHO a mus

Re: [netmod] logical systems model

-time --- Alex From: Andy Bierman [mailto:a...@yumaworks.com] Sent: Friday, August 28, 2015 2:33 PM To: Lou Berger Cc: Alexander Clemm (alex) ; netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] logical systems model On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Lou Berger mailto:lber...@labn.net>> wrote: On Aug

Re: [netmod] logical systems model

-Original Message- From: netmod [mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ladislav Lhotka Sent: Friday, August 28, 2015 4:31 AM To: Martin Bjorklund ; a...@yumaworks.com Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] logical systems model . NACM, as well as all other modules we hav

Re: [netmod] Y34 - root node

/ have dependencies on the mounted data. Regarding naming, do you have an alternative suggestion? Cheers --- Alex -Original Message- From: Martin Bjorklund [mailto:m...@tail-f.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2015 11:27 PM To: Alexander Clemm (alex) Cc: lho...@nic.cz; netmod@ietf.org

Re: [netmod] Y34 - root node

Coming late to the thread. A couple of comments to add on to and/or respond to others: - Mounting IMHO is a good way to address the requirement for various paths. As has been been mentioned, this has been successfully used e.g. for Open Daylight and the use case of mounting / referring to info

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-netmod-yang-metadata-01 (until 2015-06-29)

Hi Lada, FWIW, I have a few general question/comment on the draft, for which it might be useful to add clarification: - The general approach appears to be that metadata generally needs to be defined as part of the module, and when it is, must be supported. How about augmenting an ex