Hello Kent, Thanks for the comments. Updated all in -10 version. See below as BALAZS2. (XML2RFC at this point does not yet accept netmod-yang-module-versioning. That needs to be changed later.) Regards Balazs
-----Original Message----- From: Kent Watsen <[email protected]> Sent: 2020. március 18., szerda 3:58 To: Balázs Lengyel <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-yang-instance-file-format-06 to -07 > Have the examples in the draft validated against the YANG module? > > BALAZS: Only manually. How do you validate samples conforming to a yang data > structure ? Hmmm, seeing that the examples are still not valid, here goes: Until such time as tools support validating structure-data-ext, one can rewrite the YANG module via s/sx:structure/container/ and perform the validation against the resulting YANG module. BALAZS2: Validated with yanglint > Please review the Normative/Informative status of the references. > > Not looking carefully, but RFCs 2119 and 8174 should be Normative, > > and I think RFCs 3688 and 6020 should be Informative, right? > > BALAZS: OK, changed in rev 08 Did you check all the other references too? (I’m trying to save having to do another roundtrip when I do the shepherd writeup...) BALAZS2: I believe yes. Do you see any other problem ? > All of the “import” statements in the YANG module are missing a > “reference” statement. > BALAZS: > Added: > rfc6991 for types added. > Already present: > rfc8342 for datastores > ietf-netmod-yang-data-ext for ietf-yang-structure-ext Again, all the “import” statements in the YANG module are missing a “reference” statement. BALAZS2: OK. Sorry I misunderstood the comment earlier it. Corrected. > > Please add a statement to the Introduction regarding why the module > Isn’t compliant with NMDA. > BALAZS: Sorry, don’t understand. Why is this not compliant with NMDA ? > IMHO it is NMDA compliant, or rather it has nothing to do with NDMA. Either way but, per https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8407#section-3.5, the statement should be in the Introduction section. BALAZS2: Done > The tree diagram does not adhere to the syntax described in > draft-ietf-netmod-yang-data-ext. > BALAZS: OK I try, but what actually is the problem? Any help would be really > appreciated. I was looking at the “+—rw”, which can’t be right because yang-data is not “configuration”... > Sadly > pyang -p ../ietfYams ietf-yang-instance-data\@2020-03-06.yang -f tree > --tree-print-yang-data --tree-print-yang-data > doesn’t print out anything, so I am handcrafting. `pyang` supports the old/RFC8040 “rc:yang-data” statement; it hasn’t been updated to support the new "sx:structure” statement. BALAZS2: Done, after adding a top level container (which is not needed in structure) and some copy-paste+editing. > I just updated pyang from git. Any idea why this doesn’t work for me? > It would be good if YangValidator would print out the tree. At some point it > did. Not now. :-( First, use the s/sx:structure/container/ trick mentioned above. Then s/+--rw/+—/. Then review https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netmod-yang-data-ext-05#section-3 and tweak accordingly until all is good. BALAZS2: Done, I hope NEW: looking at the new "format-version”, please add a pattern statement to constrain the string values appropriately. Hint, it’s half a "date-and-time” type... BALAZS2: Done
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
