Please find inline.
Rohit R Ranade -----Original Message----- From: Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 27 September 2018 14:22 To: Rohit R Ranade <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [netmod] RFC 8342 : Query about NMDA Origin for Non-presence containers On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 08:40:10AM +0000, Rohit R Ranade wrote: > Hi All, > > Section 5.3.4: > "The > origin applies to all configuration nodes except non-presence > containers. " > > In ietf-origin YANG module: > md:annotation origin { > type origin-ref; > description > "The 'origin' annotation can be present on any configuration > data node in the operational state datastore. It specifies > from where the node originated. If not specified for a given > configuration data node, then the origin is the same as the > origin of its parent node in the data tree. The origin for > any top-level configuration data nodes must be specified."; > } > > > C.1. System Example: > The root node "system", is config-true and a non-presence container, > and in the example, does not have the "origin" meta-data attribute > > > Keeping all the above points in mind, which is the correct way ? Whether the > top-level configuration node should contain the "origin" attribute for > Non-presence containers ? > Let me first clarify the difference between 'a node carrying an origin annotation' and 'an origin annotation applying to a node': - Any node can 'carry an origin annotation' (but it may not apply to the node). If a node does not 'carry an origin annotation', then the parent node is inspected whether it carries an origin annotation. - An origin annotation applys to a node if it is a node to which an origin annotation can be applied. Since non-presence containers have meaning by themself, the origin annotation does not apply to non-presence containers (but they may still 'carry an origin annotation'. Given the requirement stated in the definition md:annotation origin, it seems that the "system" top-level container should have an origin annotation. (One can debate whether this requirement is too strict since in the example an origin annotation of the "system" top-level container would not apply to anything since all the nodes below "system" have explicit origin annotations.) [Rohit R Ranade] So how to decide the origin annotation for top-level non-presence container. Consider the case of "nacm" root node of ietf-netconf-acm module which is a container. Consider that "enable-nacm" came via "intended" origin, and "read-default" came via "default" origin. +--rw nacm +--rw enable-nacm? boolean +--rw read-default? action-type +--rw write-default? action-type +--rw exec-default? action-type [Rohit R Ranade] So how to decide the origin for the container, when its child may have mixed origin ? /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103 <https://www.jacobs-university.de/> _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
