Hi Rob, Thanks - that's what I thought but wanted a second opinion. Fortunately we can expand the groupings in-place to work around this, but obviously at the cost of lower maintainability and with the risk of divergence if the grouping content ever changes.
William From: Robert Wilton [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 15 December 2017 17:42 To: Ivory, William <[email protected]>; '[email protected]' <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [netmod] Query about augmenting 'config false' YANG Looks valid to me. Thanks, Rob On 15/12/2017 14:02, Ivory, William wrote: Hi, I'm running into a problem where my YANG is being rejected by a NETCONF client that claims it can't find the node being augmented. The YANG snippet below shows the problem which relates specifically to augmenting a node that is 'config false'. AFAICT from reading RFC 6020, this is valid YANG, but I would appreciate confirmation from the experts! Pyang is quite happy with this. Thanks, William --- sample yang to show problem --- grouping state-grouping { container state { config false; leaf state-grp-state-leaf { type string; } } } container test { container state-cont { config false; leaf state-leaf { type string; } } } augment /test/state-cont { // Augment 'config false' container directly works. leaf augmented-state-leaf { type string; } } augment /test { uses state-grouping { // Augment here fails - 'state' not found. augment state { leaf aug-state-grp-leaf { type string; } } } } _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_netmod&d=DwMD-g&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=p8kyeK3u4ZYiaQ2ZPGqwkyXmQgBH6r5jpYiYWzhqJ48&m=HCzkzCTDorlm-kZkArWnL8xiokaSmvuSB46O7_s22rI&s=VuNhyO6EwnN1CvYSx3ydeNZavvaemy1ReKEwVNaFMBc&e=>
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
