On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 6:22 AM, Ladislav Lhotka <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On 21 Oct 2015, at 15:07, Andy Bierman <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 5:46 AM, Ladislav Lhotka <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On 21 Oct 2015, at 14:33, Andy Bierman <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > IMO we do not need lots of rules for when-stmt. > > > They are harder to enforce than just implementing the auto-deletion. > > > > > > Note that auto-deletion also applies to nodes already in candidate or > running. > > > It is just a derivative case to have a newly-created node deleted > right away. > > > If you add node /foo it may cause node /bar and node /baz to get > deleted. > > > > > > I strongly object to treating a false when-stmt in a datastore > validation > > > as an error. This is not how YANG 1.0 works, and this is not > > > backward-compatible. > > > > I think it has nothing to do with YANG (1.0 or whatever), and RFC 6020 > correctly describes this auto-deletion behaviour for "choice" in sec. 7.9.6 > NETCONF <edit-config> Operations. It is indeed protocol business - YANG > spec should just define what's valid and what isn't. > > > > IMO RESTCONF spec doesn't require auto-deletion. > > > > > > > > Our server uses the same validation engine for both protocols. > > RESTCONF does not change the behavior of YANG in any way. > > I don't see how YANG validation procedures would not apply to RESTCONF. > > The validation procedure does apply (the notion of a valid data tree has > to be the same) but auto-deletion doesn't because it is specified in > "NETCONF <edit-config> ..." sections (7.9.6 and 8.3.2), and RESTCONF > doesn't use <edit-config>. > > > > > YANG says that the node semantics apply IFF the when-stmt evaluates to > true. > > It is up to the implementation to enforce that. It applies to > server-created > > nodes or nodes created via some protocol. > > Yes, but it can be enforced either by auto-deleting offending nodes, or by > refusing to accept changes that lead to an invalid configuration. > > But the "when-stmt" never causes an error for application within a datastore. The text in sec. 8 does not apply because the when-stmt is not on any object in the RPC being processed. Only this text applies: The "when" statement makes its parent data definition statement conditional. The node defined by the parent data definition statement is only valid when the condition specified by the "when" statement is satisfied. The NETCONF specific text needs to change. Simply putting , "For example, NETCONF ..." might be enough. > Lada > > Andy > > > > > > Lada > > > > Andy > > > > > > > > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 5:16 AM, Balazs Lengyel < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > Hello Martin, > > > I would want to codify this. My earlier proposal was: > > > > > > - when MUST NOT be dependent on a data node controlled by a when or > choice statement > > > > > > Notice the strong MUST NOT statement. This would simplify life greatly. > > > regards Balazs > > > > > > On 2015-10-20 10:09, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > > I have never seen anyone trying to refer to the conditional nodes in a > > > when expression - simply b/c it doesn't make any sense. > > > > > > -- > > > Balazs Lengyel Ericsson Hungary Ltd. > > > Senior Specialist > > > ECN: 831 7320 > > > Mobile: +36-70-330-7909 email: > [email protected] > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > netmod mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod > > > > > > > -- > > Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs > > PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs > PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C > > > > >
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
