Martin, I will remove my objection to Y45-04 if you write a section in the draft about why multiple imports of the same module is needed, plus examples that show appropriate use of this new feature.
I also think examples are needed that highlight how data nodes and augments ignore the revision date (multiple module augments example), while still using groupings and typedefs that do not ignore the revision dates. IETF modules should not need to cherry-pick from multiple revisions. That means the WG is deciding to stay "down-rev" on something, and that should not be approved without good reason. Andy On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Martin Bjorklund <[email protected]> wrote: > Andy, > > I don't think the implementation burden on the server is that heavy. > A YANG 1.0 compliant server today supports: > > leaf a in module A of type foo from foo@2001-01-01 > leaf b in module B of type foo from foo@2002-02-02 > > I.e., it supports different leafs in the combined data model referring > to different versions of the same type. > > A YANG 1.1 server would also support > > leaf a in module A of type foo from foo@2001-01-01 > leaf b in module A of type foo from foo@2002-02-02 > > Of course, how much a specific implementation is affected will vary, > but I don't think the concepts are *that* different. > > > /martin _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
