Subject: [NGO] modules vs. namespaces

From: Andy Bierman <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2008 11:24:59 -0700

Hi,

This thread on module names and version IDs demonstrates
that we are finally working on NETCONF content (!).

The NETCONF protocol just recognizes content as an XML blob,
consisting of a bunch of QNames that match data model nodes.
There is no concept of a 'module' within the protocol.

Now maybe we are finally moving beyond the 'XML blob', and a
NETCONF database can be managed as a collection of conceptual
modules.  Obviously, we have to allow for non-YANG modules,
but from a standards-POV, these will remain just QNames in the XML blob.

Instead of ad-hoc, highly variable support for specific
NETCONF operations, as allowed within the XML blob, and
documented in proprietary <appinfo> extensions,
humans and applications could have a consistent and precise
description of the configuration data, and the protocol operations
that must be supported on that data.

Andy

_______________________________________________
NGO mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ngo