> On 30 Jul 2015, at 13:31, Jernej Tuljak <jern...@mg-soft.si> wrote: > > Ladislav Lhotka je 30.7.2015 ob 11:30 napisal: >>> On 30 Jul 2015, at 01:12, Andy Bierman <a...@yumaworks.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 10:51 AM, Martin Bjorklund <m...@tail-f.com> wrote: >>> Andy Bierman <a...@yumaworks.com> wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I understand the intent is that an implementation of NACM >>>> has to understand these NACM extensions. I agree with Lada >>>> that the YANG text about MAY ignore extensions casts doubt whether >>>> this sort of NACM rule is enforceable or specified correctly. >>> So do you agree that it would be a good idea to clarify this >>> according to Juergen's suggestion? >>> >>> >>> >>> Not really. >>> Pretending the extension is just another description-stmt >>> does not really fix anything. >> In fact, generic tools like pyang ignore what’s written in descriptions. > > Where does RFC6020 say that description-stmt may be used for defining > additional semantics? The only instance where I can find
Nowhere. That’s why I also proposed to add the following sentence to the section about “description” statement: Constraints and rules stated in the text of a “description” statement are an integral and binding part of the data model. Lada > "description" and "semantics" or "meaning" in the same sentence, is in the > section that describes module updates. This is what a YANG description is: > > The "description" statement takes as an argument a string that > contains a human-readable textual description of this definition. > The text is provided in a language (or languages) chosen by the > module developer; for the sake of interoperability, it is RECOMMENDED > to choose a language that is widely understood among the community of > network administrators who will use the module. > > A textual description for humans. A docstring. I don't see semantics being > mentioned anywhere, so where is all this coming from? > > Jernej > >> >> Lada >> >>> A real YANG statement like config-stmt or a new statement >>> called ephemeral-stmt can be modified with refine-stmt >>> or deviate-stmt. This can never happen for >>> an external statement. >>> >>> >>> IMO ephemeral data support needs to be a real statement >>> that can be used with refine-stmt and deviate-stmt. >>> It is a real property of a data node. >>> >>> >>> /martin >>> >>> >>> >>> Andy >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> Andy >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Martin Bjorklund <m...@tail-f.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Andy Bierman <a...@yumaworks.com> wrote: >>>>>> The real difference is that extensions can be ignored by all >>>>>> YANG tools and real statements cannot be ignored. >>>>> Are you saying that a server that advertises both ietf-system and nacm >>>>> is free to ignore the nacm statements in ietf-system, and for example >>>>> by default provide read-access to >>>>> /system/radius/server/udp/shared-secret? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> /martin >>>>> >> -- >> Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs >> PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> netmod mailing list >> netmod@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod -- Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
