Andy Bierman <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 12:44 AM Martin Bjorklund <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Andy Bierman <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > I do not agree these changes should be made at this late date. > > > It seems to me that in order to support a feature you have to implement > > it, > > > and therefore if any features are set then the module is implemented, not > > > imported. > > > > But this is not what RFC 7950 says about implement: > > > > A server implements a module if it implements the module's data > > nodes, RPCs, actions, notifications, and deviations. > > > > > All features should be set to false in an import-only module. > > > > > > IMO this interpretation holds for typedef modules like iana-crypt-hash. > > > We list that as implemented (because it is) and the features that are > > > supported are set. > > > > If a module consists only of typedefs, there is no problem. > > Conformance "import" or "import-only" modules exist in YL b/c modules > > may have a mix of typedefs and data nodes etc. > > > > So in the case that Lada brought up, a server would have to list the > > module as implemented with a certain set of features; and then also > > deviate all nodes/rpc/notifc etc as 'not-implemented'. > > > > > So what. Using deviate(not-supported) to cherry-pick what you want to > implement > out of a module is how it is supposed to work. > > A server has to implement a feature to advertise it.
As per 7950, this is not true, as I pointed out earlier. Note that with current YL (RFC 7895), it *is* in fact possible to handle this case; you can list the features supported for an import-only module. The new YL removes this possibility (by mistake). /martin > Therefore the module containing the feature cannot be import-only. > > > > > /martin > > > > > Andy > > > > > > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 11:03 AM Martin Bjorklund <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > Ladislav Lhotka <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > unlike RFC 7895, 7895bis doesn't provide the "feature" leaf list for > > > > > import-only modules. But is it really so that features have no use in > > > > > such modules? > > > > > > > > > > For example, an enum can depend on a feature, and if it is inside a > > > > > typedef, it can also be in an import-only module. What if that > > feature > > > > > is defined in the same module? > > > > > > > > I think you're right, and that this is an unfortunate omission. > > > > > > > > The fix is simple though; we would have to add the leaf-list features > > > > to import-only. Probably refactor the "feature" leaf-list into a > > > > grouping so it works like the grouping location-leaf-list: > > > > > > > > grouping feature-leaf-list { > > > > leaf-list feature { > > > > type yang:yang-identifier; > > > > description > > > > "List of all YANG feature names from this module that are > > > > supported by the server, regardless whether they are defined > > > > in the module or any included submodule."; > > > > } > > > > } > > > > > > > > And then "uses feature-leaf-list": > > > > > > > > OLD: > > > > > > > > grouping module-implementation-parameters { > > > > description > > > > "Parameters for describing the implementation of a module."; > > > > > > > > leaf-list feature { > > > > type yang:yang-identifier; > > > > description > > > > "List of all YANG feature names from this module that are > > > > supported by the server, regardless whether they are defined > > > > in the module or any included submodule."; > > > > } > > > > > > > > NEW: > > > > > > > > grouping module-implementation-parameters { > > > > description > > > > "Parameters for describing the implementation of a module."; > > > > > > > > uses feature-leaf-list; > > > > > > > > > > > > And in the list "import-only": > > > > > > > > OLD: > > > > > > > > uses location-leaf-list; > > > > > > > > uses feature-leaf-list; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /martin > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > netmod mailing list > > > > [email protected] > > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod > > > > > > _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
