> On 18 Oct 2015, at 11:52, Juergen Schoenwaelder > <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 06:03:57PM +0200, Martin Bjorklund wrote: >> >> Ok, you're right. 8.2.1 should be kept as it is. (we may need to >> rephrase the intro text in 8.2) But I think Balazs is also right. >> Suppose you have: >> >> leaf a { >> when "../b = 42"; >> type int32; >> } >> leaf b { >> type int32; >> } >> >> and the db contains b=10. >> >> Suppose I send an edit-config with a=2. What is the result? >> >> 1) you get an error back >> 2) you get ok; the request to set a to 2 is silently dropped >> 3) something else >> > > Isn't the simplest to always make the changes that were requested in > the rpc/action (e.g. edit-config) and then to validate the result and > if it fails to validate to return an error? No magic addition or > removal of nodes while trying to guess what the client wanted to > achieve. I am likely missing details since I never implemented this
That would be the type of behaviour I'd prefer. The auto-deletion feature also goes against the principle of least embarrassement - a trivial error can inadvertently erase substantial parts of a data tree. Lada > but having a processing logic that is simple to understand would be > good and I think it is fair to expect that clients send edits that > do not require the server to guess what should happen. > > /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 -- Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
