1. Pages
2. …
3. OIMT
4. IISOMI
5. IISOMI Minutes

2023-01-13 IISOMI Meeting notes

13 Jan 2023 Leader: Kam; (Not available: )

20 Jan 2023 Leader: Bernd; (Not available: )

27 Jan 2023 Leader: Scott; (Not available:)

03 Feb 2023 Leader: Kam; (Not available: )

10 Feb 2023 Leader: Cancelled

17 Feb 2023 Leader: Nigel; (Not available: )

24 Feb 2023 Leader: Scott; (Not available: Kam) (May adjust to 8:00 PST to accommodate Kam)

03 Mar 2023 Leader: ; (Not available: Kam)

10 Mar 2023 Leader: ; (Not available: Kam)

Not discussed at this meeting. Deferred to next meeting.

IISOMI Action Items done or past due

Action items done:

Due dates of the following action items updated:

Scott brought up to our attention that in IETF, there is an individaul I-D "YANG Extension and Metadata annotation for Immutable Flag" 

• Individual I-D: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ma-netmod-immutable-flag-04
  
• 
• There are usage examples in Appendix A of the I-D
• Scott is asking for more usage examples from UML models
• Kam mentioned the example of the granularityPeriod attribute of the CurrentData object class. 
  • See the extraction below from the G.8052.1 Amd.1 Data Dictionary
  • 
  • which is config-true at creation, and then it should not be changed after creation (i.e., immutable).

Question: To find out if the tool is inferring the augment path from the composition associations OR form the target property of the «Specify» association.

• In the specify stereotype (target) of the uml model, the elements of the path of the target are separated by the delimitor "/".
• Each element of the path has 3 components, namely ModelName:ClassName:MemberEndName.
• The member end is an attribute of the class. ClassName is not necessary in YANG (according to Italo).

Answer: Scott found out that the tool infers from the target property of the «Specify» association.

yangification:

So, not inferrring from the containment tree. Just by the target path, in each element it takes the first component (module name) and the third component (member end name) and then yangify. No intelligent at all.

However, the tool doesn't check whether the class (the middle component) is abstract or concrete.

All

Not discussed at this meeting. Deferred to next meeting.

Question statement: Should the UML Modelling Guidelines allow concrete specification classes like TAPI is using it?

Bernd offered to represent the 4 slides that he used on the last call (as several people on the call today were not present on that call).

none