On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 2:14 PM, Martin Bjorklund <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi, > > I am preparing a new version of draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis in order > to address Y45-04. Note that YANG 1.1 uses the module > ietf-yang-library from draft-ietf-netconf-yang-library (hence the > crossposting). > > [BTW, shouldn't ietf-yang-library be moved to NETMOD?] > > We have a whole bunch of documents that have a normative reference to > draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis, which has a normative reference to > draft-ietf-netconf-yang-library. This means we need to finish this > document pretty soon. > > I ran into some issues with ietf-yang-library: > > 1. The leaf "conformance" is of type "boolean". It is not obvious > what "conformance = false" means. Should we change the name > and/or type of this leaf? > > I don't have a good proposal, but what we need is a way to > indicate "I implement the protocol accessible nodes in this > module" vs. "I just list this module b/c some other module that > I implement uses typdefs/groupings/... from it". > > This issue is related to the github issue #3. I think we need > this information; Y45-04 relies on it. > > We went through this before and you didn't have a better suggestion last time either. conformance=false means the server is not claiming conformance for this module. A NETCONF <hello> should not have any modules tagged as conformance=false. CoMI relies on this module as well. It has been ready for WGLC since January. > > 2. The "/modules/module" list is keyed by "name" and "revision". > Should we really have "revision" as key? A server can only > implement one revision of a module, and should only list one > revision of a module w/ conformance = false. I suggest we make > this leaf mandatory, and not part of the key. > I am not in favor of this change. Two modules "foo" and "bar" released on the same date could not be represented. I think the indexing is fine in the current draft. The <get-schema> operation in NETCONF and RESTCONF need the module name and the revision-date. This module should not care how many revisions of each module are listed. This is the full YANG library, not a <hello> message. > > /martin > > Andy > > > > _______________________________________________ > netmod mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod >
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
