On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 12:11 PM, Kent Watsen <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
>
>
> On 8/25/17, 2:21 PM, "Andy Bierman" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Obviously NMDA cannot be used for objects where the configuration value
> set
>
> > and the operstate value set differ, such as with the interface
> admin-status/oper-status.
>
> > Do you want a sentence added that says to use config false leafs as
> needed within the
>
> > configuration entry? A sentence that says operational data is embedded
> in the
>
> > configuration entry?
>
>
>
> Yes, and any other general guidelines around using config false.   The
> text I posted
>
> when starting this thread had some of that.  The original RFC6087 text
> might have
>
> some more.
>
>
>

OK -- I will work on adding in text from -12, your text, and Lou's text.


>
> > 6087bis was supposed to be a minor update, not a living draft that
> doubles
>
> > as a YANG tutorial and ongoing issues list.
>
>
>
>  ;)
>
>
>
> As much as I like RFCs, I think this content would be better served by a
> Wiki.   If
>
> we were starting for scratch (no RFC6087), then that might make sense but,
> given
>
> where we are, not so much.  So, I guess we're committed to frequent
> updates on this
>
> document until YANG settles down.
>
>
>

It is better to have as few moving targets (and normative references) as
possible.
YANG modules in an RFC have to conform to a specific version of the YANG
guidelines.


>
>
> Kent // contributor
>
>
>
>
>

Andy
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

Reply via email to