> -----Original Message-----
> From: netmod [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Robert
> Varga
> Sent: Tuesday, October 4, 2016 1:55 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [netmod] Augment non-existing input?
>
> Hello,
>
> I would like to ask about interoperability of RPC's input statement and
> augments. Given two modules:
>
> module foo {
> rpc foo {
> output {
> leaf foo { type string; }
> }
> }
> }
>
> module bar {
> import foo { prefix foo; }
>
> augment /foo:foo/input {
> leaf bar { type string; }
> }
> }
>
> Should the augment statement trigger a failure or not?
>
> My take is that it should fail, as the lack of an empty input statement
> in foo indicates the author's intent that the RPC should not have an
> extensible input...
It would would be an error because there is no "input" list/container from
bar's namespace present in the target module. What you probably meant is:
augment /foo:foo/foo:input {}
which is perfectly fine. The "input" schema node is inherently present within
an "rpc" schema node even if not explicitly defined. Both in YANG 1 and 1.1.
The "rpc" statement defines an rpc node in the schema tree. Under
the rpc node, a schema node with the name "input", and a schema node
with the name "output" are also defined. The nodes "input" and
"output" are defined in the module's namespace.
Jernej
>
> Thanks,
> Robert
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
