Hi,
Amar Jadagoud <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have one doubt regarding origin-filter filtering in case of parent-child
> hierarchy.
>
> If child class instance fields match with origin-filter value but parent
> class instance fields does not, then what should be the rpc-reply content?
> Does it need to include parent class instance record with only key fields
> along with child class record or it should not include both parent and
> child class instance record?
This is not special for origin-filter, but applies to all filters.
The description of get-data says:
Any ancestor nodes (including list keys) of nodes selected by
the filters are included in the response.
Hope this answers your question.
/martin
>
> Consider example given in 3.1.1.4 section of
> draft-ietf-netconf-nmda-netconf-08 :
>
> <rpc message-id="102"
> xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0">
> <get-data xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-netconf-nmda"
> xmlns:ds="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-datastores"
> xmlns:or="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-origin">
> <datastore>ds:operational</datastore>
> <subtree-filter>
> <bgp xmlns="http://example.com/ns/bgp"/>
> </subtree-filter>
> <origin-filter>or:intended</origin-filter>
> <origin-filter>or:system</origin-filter>
> <with-origin/>
> </get-data>
> </rpc>
>
>
> <rpc-reply message-id="102"
> xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0">
> <data xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-netconf-nmda">
> <bgp xmlns="http://example.com/ns/bgp";
> xmlns:or="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-origin"
> or:origin="or:intended">
> <peer>
> <name>2001:db8::2:3</name>
> <local-port or:origin="or:system">60794</local-port>
> <state>established</state>
> </peer>
> </bgp>
> </data>
> </rpc-reply>
>
> In the above example, user has provided origin-filter as system and
> intended in the RPC request. So rpc-reply has both parent record with
> "intended" origin and child record with "system" origin.
>
> What if user has provided only origin-filter="system" ? Do we need to
> provide parent record with "intended" origin in the rpc-reply or should not
> provide both parent and child record ?
>
> Thanks,
> Amar
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
