16:04:24 #startmeeting MD-SAL interest call 16:04:24 Meeting started Tue Oct 20 16:04:24 2015 UTC. The chair is colindixon. Information about MeetBot at http://ci.openstack.org/meetbot.html. 16:04:24 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 16:04:24 The meeting name has been set to 'md_sal_interest_call' 16:05:49 #topic agenda 16:06:17 #info Stephen Kitt's e-mail on what happened this week in code 16:06:26 #info Real world NETCONF device in Beryllium 16:06:40 #info Jersey Upgrade: Bug 4502 odl-tsdr-cassandra-persistence depends on non-odlparent guava version 16:06:48 #topic jersey upgrade 16:07:32 #info rgouiding found a bug with guava/cassadra versions in TSDR making upgrading jersery hard, he's working on it 16:07:59 #info version missmatch (on guava) when installing the feature, may require upgrading the cassandra plugin 16:08:14 #info it's delaying the jersey upgrade 16:10:57 #topic stephen kitt's weekly summary of code changes 16:11:19 #link https://lists.opendaylight.org/pipermail/dev/2015-October/001333.html 16:11:37 #info two things for YANG tools seem maybe relevant 16:11:53 #info 1. Leaf references no longer have a default value, as per RFC 6020. 16:12:08 To whomever was asking about the TWS recording from this week. It is now on the TWS wiki page, and the link direct link is here: https://meetings.webex.com/collabs/url/vmEyFTg5E0d_q6B4GhsQX4Wj57zVGp67L9mIS-7NDyK00000 16:12:17 #info 2. Mis-matched module/submodule revisions no longer cause a NullPointerException (but you should still fix the revisions!). 16:13:34 #info rovarga says that (1) above was removing pre-hydrogen code that didn't completely work and thus people couldn't have been using it 16:15:09 #topic real world NETCONF devices aren't mounting in Berryllium 16:15:54 #info ghall says that he's working with a lot of people who are using ODL to mount NETCONF devices to call RPCs, etc. and write apps using that 16:16:30 #info ghall is running into issues that real devices that claim to support NETCONF don't always follow the spec perfectly, and even when they do sometimes interpret the spec the same way that ODL does 16:16:45 #info ghall says he'd like to see us be tolerant of non-strict yang 16:17:12 #link https://lists.opendaylight.org/pipermail/netconf-dev/2015-October/000066.html thread on the netconf-dev list raising this issue 16:19:06 #link https://bugs.opendaylight.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4492 this is the related bug 16:20:05 #info ghall and maros seem to be saying having a passthrough to get the data back from a NETCONF device without parsing it (at least strictly) assuming we can mount it 16:22:53 #info rovarga asks how this would work for things other than RESTCONF, e.g., reading from Binding Aware types 16:23:28 #info rovarga notes that there are individual ways to to fix up individual models and that might be a better overall way to approach things 16:25:18 #link https://git.opendaylight.org/gerrit/#/c/28511/ a (partial) patch to start fixing some of the issues 16:26:42 #info ghall is looking for a way to mount semi-compliant devices in the Beryllium time-frame, e.g., we should try to parse and deliver what data we can (maybe dropping just the yang which is invalid) 16:29:35 #info ghall says that in this case and many other cases this is clearly a bug with vendor code, in the idea world we would file the bug, get the bug fixed, and then end-users would upgrade before testing or using it with opendaylight 16:30:41 #info ghall says in the real world, that's not going to happen and we should figure out how much we want to inconvenience end-users who happen to have devices that aren't totally supporting NETCONF to the same strictness that OpenDaylight does 16:31:15 #info ghall says in practice this is causing him additional problems with values on a device being set outside their range in the YANG file 16:33:37 #info colindixon suggests that a good litmus test would be to ask "are we unnecessarily punishing end-users for their vendors poor behavior?" 16:33:51 #info if the answer is yes, then we should do our best to avoid doing that 16:34:58 #info it seems like at least allowing a user to choose (globally, per-model, per-something-else?) whether to allow for sloppy vs. strict enforcement so that they can do what a manually constructed NETCONF call could do 16:35:07 #undo 16:35:07 Removing item from minutes: 16:37:33 #info it seems like at least allowing a user to choose (globally, per-model, per-something-else?) whether to allow for sloppy vs. strict enforcement so that they can do what a manually constructed NETCONF call could do would be a maybe a reasonable approach 16:38:21 #info ghall notes that right now in his day-to-day development effort he's able to do things with ncclient and get his work done there in a way he can't with NETCONF mounts in ODL 16:39:27 #info the discussion seems to revolve around the issue that if we allow sloppy mounting for devices, that potentially risks how apps and users perceive the system by compromising the strictness which the MD-SAL currently provides 16:41:07 #info ttkacik and rovarga ask if we allow a get-config to work despite not parsing strictly, will we allow a edit-config to allow for them to pass the same data back? 16:41:28 #info ghall says that he doesn't quite understand why we're even parsing when we make RESTCONF calls to YANG mounts 16:41:56 #info ttkacik says that's not quite true, you have to parse it to provide RESTCONF features, e.g., converting to JSON 16:42:40 #info ghall asks if we were asking for XML and XML only, could we allow for just a passthrough, ttkacik says yes, but that might confuse users by not allowing for RESTCONF JSON 16:46:23 #info colindixon says his take is that we're really talking about having a way to do a sloppy mount over NETCONF and provide the information to anyone who wants that it's a sloppy mount and could provide a reasonable trade-off between device compatibly and user/app expectations 16:47:01 #info rovarga says that this should all be doable today in the NETCONF project if we wanted to, he'd want to make sure that we track what things we've violated in the process of doing a sloppy mount 16:50:45 #info colindixon disagrees that we necessarily need a list of violations to have it be useful, a simple sloppy bit would be enough, but he's willing to agree to disagree 16:52:57 #info ghall says he'd like to work on this at the hackfest 11/9 and 11/10 16:53:27 #info rovarga asks if he can move BUG 4492 to the netconf project instead of yangtools, his take is that the issues raised can be fixed there 16:54:33 #info ghall says sure "as longs as we're happy returning a supposedly mounted, but useless NETCONF devices on an NPE" 16:56:11 #info ghall says basically there are still bugs in YANG tools to at least provide more meaningful error messages 16:59:14 #action ghall to rework his patch to allow for better errors and/or better mounting in YANG tools 16:59:18 #topic hackfest 16:59:33 #info ghall asks who from the MD-SAL core team will be there 16:59:45 #info none planning to come now 17:00:07 #info colindixon asks what would help them attend, rovarga asks for a concrete agenda and work items 17:00:31 #action phrobb to work with rovarga and ghall and others to develop a better agenda 17:00:34 #endmeeting