It's unclear to me why Y45-04 is needed at all.  Doesn't a newer revision
of a module contain all the same typedefs from before, and thus a module
could import just the more recent revision to get everything it needs?
Why would a module ever have to import an older revision?

RFC 6020 says "New typedefs, groupings, rpcs, notifications, extensions,
features, and identities may be added."   I take this to imply that they
cannot be removed or even renamed.  Is this not the case?

Thanks,
Kent


On 5/19/15, 5:59 AM, "Juergen Schoenwaelder"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Hi,
>
>after long discussions in physical meetings, virtual meetings, and on
>the mailing list, I believe we have reached rough consensus to adopt
>Y45-04 in order to resolve import ambiguities (aka typedef drift and
>grouping drift) and we will leave it to YANG extensions (to be worked
>on in the future) to provide means to define explicit conformance
>requirements (instead of trying to derive conformance requirements
>from import relationships alone). A recent poll of core contributors
>on this issue can be found here:
>
>http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netmod/current/msg12560.html
>
>Please speak up by Monday 2015-05-25 if you disagree with this
>proposal and your position is not yet included in the email message
>pointed to above.
>
>For more details, see the issues list available here:
>
>     http://svn.tools.ietf.org/svn/wg/netmod/yang-1.1/
>
>/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 protected]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

Reply via email to