On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 12:19:42PM +0100, t.petch wrote:
> This I-D updates RFC7950, since it changes the XPath context that YANG
> uses, yet there is no mention of 'Updates'

I think the editors of the document reached the conclusion that the
xpath context rules stated in section 5.1. are the only meaningful
interpretation which is consistent with what RFC 7950 says.

The question is whether the text 'changes' the xpath context, or
'refines' the xpath context, or 'clarifies' the xpath context.  On a
synchronous system (where intended config and applied config never
differ), there is no change at all.

That said, I have no strong opinion about the question whether section
5.1 requires an 'Updates: RFC 7950' or not. I do not think section 5.1
is relevant for a system that uses RFC 7950 without implementing NMDA
and hence the value of having a forward pointer from RFC 7950 to NMDA
is likely not critical to have.

/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

Reply via email to