Hi, folks:
Suppose we have multiple content match nodes, however these content match nodes
are not sibling nodes, instead, they are child nodes of each sibling node,
Should we see Multiple content match nodes (i.e., sibling nodes) being logically
combined in an "AND" expression or in an "OR" expression? Depending on the
answer, here are two usage example:
<rpc message-id="101" xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0" >
<get>
<filter type="subtree">
<top>
<interfaces>
<interface>
<ipv4>
<forwarding>false</forwarding>
<enable/>
<mtu/>
</ipv4>
<ipv6>
<mtu>1000</mtu>
<enable/>
<forwarding/>
</ipv6
</ipv6>
</interface>
</interfaces>
</top>
</filter>
</get>
</rpc>
In this example, <mtu> and <forwarding> leaf are child node of <ipv4> container
node and <ipv6> container node respectively,
<ipv4> container node and <ipv6> container node are sibling nodes.
The RPC-reply could have two options,
Option A: both <forwarding> under <ipv4> container and <mtu> under <ipv6>
container are matched,
<rpc-reply message-id="101" xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0" >
<data xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0">
<top>
<interfaces>
<interface>
<ipv4>
<enable>true</enable>
<forwarding>false</forwarding>
<mtu>1400</mtu>
</ipv4>
<ipv6>
<enable>true</enable>
<forwarding>true</forwarding>
<mtu>1000</mtu>
</ipv6>
</interface>
</interfaces>
</top>
</data>
</rpc-reply>
Option B: only <mtu> under <ipv6> container is matched and <forwarding> under
<ipv4> is not matched
<rpc-reply message-id="101" xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0" >
<data xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0">
<top>
<interfaces>
<interface>
<ipv6>
<enable>true</enable>
<forwarding>true</forwarding>
<mtu>1000</mtu>
</ipv6>
</interface>
</interfaces>
</top>
</data>
</rpc-reply>
Are these RPC-reply correct? How do we see the matching relation between these
content matches nodes?
-Qin
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
