On 11/8/2017 4:50 PM, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
The "use-schema" case shouldn't pose big problems because it is
essentially an externally specified augment. The "inline" case is
somewhat disturbing though: could the embedded YANG library instances
be different in different datastores?
YANG Library is only available in <operational> (it's all config false).
I think you mean the embedded YANG Library instances under the mount
points. Yes, you may have a problem here. Still, this isn't my question,
is more about schema-mounting requirements across datastores. E.g., if
a schema-mount exists in <running>, must it existing in <intended> and
<operational> as well? Conversely, if a schema-mount exists in
<operational>, must it exist in <running>? I think this draft should
clarify such things.
I agree that this needs to be clarified. This issue partly comes from
the fact that schema mount uses the groupings in the old yang
library. I think we need to use the new groupings from rfc7895bis.
We previously discussed this point an chose not to use rfc7895bis as we
wanted to allow current implementations to add support NIs/LNEs with
minimal additional work, and specifically not require support for
rfc7895bis and NMDA to support LNEs/NIs (and consequently schema mount).
I do think it would be good to have rfc7895bis supersede
ietf-yang-schema-mount by incorporating its functionality, but that
wouldn't be a change to this document.
Lou
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
