Thanks Martin - see inline.
On 8/8/18, 3:43 AM, "Martin Bjorklund" <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi,
"Acee Lindem \(acee\)" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Is it possible to indicate that choice statement must be specified
> in a YANG 1.1 “must” clause w/o specifying every case?
Do you mean that you to ensure that a case is always configured? If
so, mark the choice as "mandatory true". It can't be done with an
XPath expression.
It's not that easy since at the least the choice or another leaf must be
specified. I found that the choice and case identifiers are not part of the
Xpath. Even after rereading some sections of RFC7950, this wasn't intuitive.
Thanks,
Acee
/martin
> Similarly, it is there a way specify that a container cannot be empty in
“must” clause?
> Thanks,
> Acee
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
