On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 10:21 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder < [email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 09, 2017 at 10:55:20AM +0000, Bogaert, Bart (Nokia - > BE/Antwerp) wrote: > > > > We have a question regarding the statistics container as defined in the > > interfaces-state model. This container defines one mandatory leaf > > (discontinuity-time) while all other leafs are optional. What is the > > rationale behind this leaf being mandatory and not an optional field? > > > > It does not make a lot of sense to return a discontinuity-time value and > no > > counters if none of the counters are relevant for a specific interface. > > > > Another alternative could be to add, via a deviation, a when clause to > the > > container indicating for which ifType(s) the container is (or is not) > > present. But that would lead to not supporting the IETF interfaces model > to > > the full extent. > > > > The discontinuity-time is relevant for _any_ counter associated with > an interface, regardless whether the counter is defined in the > interfaces model or elsewhere. I have a hard time to imagine an > interface that has zero counters. > > The mandatory-stmt is very confusing for config=false nodes. Mandatory=true means an <rpc-reply> must contain an instance of the mandatory leaf. Mandatory=false does not mean optional-to-implement although it sure looks that way for config=false nodes. Only if-feature can make a node optional to implement. /js Andy -- > 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 >
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
