> On Jul 28, 2017, at 11:29 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder > <j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de> wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 11:24:13AM -0700, Mahesh Jethanandani wrote: >> >>> On Jul 28, 2017, at 11:13 AM, Phil Shafer <p...@juniper.net> wrote: >>> >>> Mahesh Jethanandani writes: >>>> What happens if I have a 'must' statement that is written for >>>> validating configuration? Will it be enforced on operational datastore? >>> >>> The last paragraph of 4.7 of the NMDA draft talks about constraints >>> in operational: >>> >>> As a result of remnant configuration, the semantic constraints >>> defined in the data model cannot be relied upon for <operational>, >>> since the system may have remnant configuration whose constraints >>> were valid with the previous configuration and that are not valid >>> with the current configuration. Since constraints on "config false" >>> nodes may refer to "config true" nodes, remnant configuration may >>> force the violation of those constraints. The constraints that may >>> not hold include "when", "must", "min-elements", and "max-elements”. >> >> Should this be a ‘may not’ or a ‘MUST NOT’? How does one decide whether >> constraints will apply or not? >> > > Mahesh, > > you report the actual operational state - if the actual operational > state violates constraints, you still report it. What else would you > do?
Then what you are suggesting is a MUST NOT. That constraints like “when”, “must”, “min-elements”, and “max-elements” MUST NOT be enforced in case of operational state. > > /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/ > <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>> Mahesh Jethanandani mjethanand...@gmail.com
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
