Subject: Re: [netmod] smi2yang general problem statement

From: "Andy Bierman" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2011 08:59:01 -0700

We have to focus on configuration.
Rewriting monitoring MIBs will take too long.  We don't have resources to redo all the standard modules.

Andy

----- Reply message -----
From: "Juergen Schoenwaelder" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, Apr 9, 2011 08:00
Subject: [netmod] smi2yang general problem statement
To: "Martin Bjorklund" <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>

On Sat, Apr 09, 2011 at 01:48:32PM +0200, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
 
> I think that the WG needs to think about and document how this mapping
> is supposed to be used.  Some people might think that with the
> publication of this mapping, IETF recommends that non-config data is
> modelled in SMIv2, and config data is modelled in YANG.  With the
> smi2yang translation, all objects are then accessible over NETCONF.
> 
> I think this would be unfortunate.
> 
> In some simple special cases, one can argue that it is better to use
> the YANG module generated from a MIB, than to write a YANG model for
> non-config data.  IF-MIB is one example.  This is a fairly simple MIB
> in its structure, and people know it well.
> 
> But in other cases, the structure of the data represented in the MIB
> might be better modelled using the features of YANG. 

A general long-term strategy does not seem to exist as far as I can
tell. Perhaps it would be nice if there were such a grand plan but
then I think writing one would be a separate effort, not part of the
SMIv2 to YANG translation specification.

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany
Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod