Hi All, Continuing with the below queries.
5. For a module like "ietf-netconf-notifications", which implements only notifications. I think this module is not suitable to be put in any of the data-stores. So a separate module-set has to be prepared for such modules but not included in any data-store. Is it correct ? 6. Similar logic will apply to any module which only defines "rpc" statements also I think. Whether need to update the yang-library draft text mentioning these two scenarios ? With Regards, Rohit R Ranade From: Rohit R Ranade Sent: 09 May 2018 08:01 To: [email protected] Subject: [netmod] Query about draft-ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis-06 Hi All, 1. "import-only-module" is currently under the "module-set" list. How does the client benefit by learning which module-set imports which modules ? 2. Whether we can keep the "import-only-module" as a sibling to module-set. And let it list all the imported modules. 3. Section 3 mentions the text "A common use case is the operational state datastore schema which is a superset of the schema used by conventional configuration datastores. ". ==> I think it should be "maybe a superset" based on Point 3 of "Objectives" section. 4. Also I feel the text about "netconf-capability-change" notification based on yang-library checksum should be moved to the NETCONF NMDA draft. Is it not more suitable there ? With Regards, Rohit R Ranade
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
