Hi Rohit,
If you have a module, "mod-state-only", that only contains "config
false" nodes then either of the following approaches is valid:
(1) You include the "mod-state-only" module in the schema for both
conventional datastores and <operational>. All config false leaves will
be ignored anyway for the configuration datastores.
(1) You define separate schema for the conventional datastores vs
operational. "mod-state-only" isn't present in the schema for the
conventional datastores, but is present in <operational>.
Either approach is valid, and I don't recall the YANG library bis draft
stating any preference.
Thanks,
Rob
On 29/05/2018 11:44, Rohit R Ranade wrote:
Hi Robert,
The Introduction section has :
“
Furthermore, the operational state datastore may support
non-configurable YANG modules in addition to
the YANG modules supported by conventional configuration datastores.
”
I infer that in the new Yang-library structure, the schema for
“conventional” data-stores should not include the non-configurable
YANG module. Is my inference correct ?
With Regards,
Rohit R Ranade
*From:*Robert Wilton [mailto:[email protected]]
*Sent:* 29 May 2018 15:28
*To:* Rohit R Ranade <[email protected]>; [email protected]
*Subject:* Re: [netmod] draft-ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis-06 deviation query
Hi Rohit,
On 29/05/2018 10:35, Rohit R Ranade wrote:
Hi All,
Consider the below YANG tree, which contains both “rw” and “ro” nodes.
module: ietf-interfaces
+--rw interfaces
| +--rw interface* [name]
| +--rw name string
| +--rw description? string
| +--rw type identityref
| +--rw enabled? boolean
| +--rw link-up-down-trap-enable? enumeration {if-mib}?
| +--ro admin-status enumeration {if-mib}?
| +--ro oper-status enumeration
| +--ro last-change? yang:date-and-time
| +--ro if-index int32 {if-mib}?
| +--ro phys-address? yang:phys-address
| +--ro higher-layer-if* interface-ref
From what I understand, in the new yang-library structure the
schema for <operational> data-store will have the complete YANG
tree. The schema for <running> will need to add deviations with
“not-supported” for all the “ro” nodes for this module ?
No need for the deviations for <running>. <running> only contains the
"config true" parts of the schema.
So, for a normal, NMDA compliant server, the same schema can be used
for all datastores.
Thanks,
Rob
With Regards,
Rohit R Ranade
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
