On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 11:36:29AM +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> > I think a better usage of two letter flags would have been this (since
> > it more naturally aligns with what the YANG definition says):
> >
> > <flags> is one of:
> > ct for configuration data
> > cf for non-configuration data
> > x- for rpcs and actions
> > xi for rpc or action input
> > xo for rpc or action output
> > n- for notifications
> > nt for notification tree (this is I think the term 7950 uses)
>
> I'm fine with this, but perhaps use "no" for notification data - "t"
> means "true" in "ct".
I once had nd (notification data) but then in the last moment moved
to nt since 7950 uses the term notification tree...
> Also, in a grouping like this:
>
> grouping my-grouping {
> leaf param { type string; }
> }
>
> pyang prints this as:
>
> my-grouping
> +---- param? string
>
> i.e., w/o any flags.
>
This makes sense, it just needs to get documented...
> > (And I think the oops leafs should have triggered an error.)
>
> They did. To stderr.
Oops, my fault.
/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
