Re: sub-tree filtering proposals

[Sandeep Adwankar <sandeep.adwankar@motorola.com>]

Andy Bierman wrote:

>
> Juergen is not proposing an adapted subset.  It is a pure subset.
> The main argument for Xpath subset here is that it will be easier
> to adapt existing tools than to build new ones from scratch.

The argument to adapt existing tools is weak.
It means that I need to rebuild xerces parser to support this
subset while still struggling to keep it within the device memory limits.
I rather prefer using xerces as it is or not to use it at all.

>
> We do not have WG consensus that all devices can support,
> and all applications need, full Xpath.  I think we have
> consensus for a limited set of features:
>   - select all nodes matching specified attribute or simple content values
>   - select a specific instance of an object, in a manner independent
>     of any instance naming scheme
>   - select specific nodes by name
>   - select by any combination of the above
>

I wonder if (future) NetConf Data model will support all these features,
or should it be part of the protocol specification. Won't these be
requirements for NetConf data model?

>
> IMO, we should do the following (yet another proposal :-)
>
>   - mandatory-to-implement subtree node selection
>   - optional-to-implement "full Xpath 1.0" node selection
>     - #xpath capability set if this is supported

I like second part: #xpath capability set that supports full XPath
for devices that can house it.

Thanks
Sandeep


--
to unsubscribe send a message to netconf-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/netconf/>