Ladislav Lhotka <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > regarding $subj: > > - What about extensions? Do modules defining them have to be > implemented? That is, is "default-revision" true or false for such > modules?
The "default-revision" leaf doesn't exist in ietf-yang-libary. I will remove the note about aligning with ietf-yang-libary, and do: OLD: If a server implements a module A that imports a module C without specifying the revision date of module C, and the server does not implement C (e.g., if C only defines some typedefs), the server MUST list module C in the "/modules/module" list from "ietf-yang-library", and it MUST set the leaf "default-revision" to "true" for this module. NEW: If a server implements a module A that imports a module C without specifying the revision date of module C, and the server does not implement C (e.g., if C only defines some typedefs), the server MUST list module C in the "/modules/module" list from "ietf-yang-library", and it MUST set the leaf "conformance" to "import" for this module. > - Third paragraph: > > OLD > > This is regardless of if module B is imported by revision or not. > > NEW > > If module B is imported by revision, the corresponding "revision-date" > statement is ignored. I think your proposed text can be misunderstood. The "revision-date" statement is not ignored; typedefs etc. will be taken from the specified revision. /martin _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
