Sorry about the incomplete e-mail. Try again From: Teas <[email protected]> on behalf of Martin Björklund via Datatracker <[email protected]> Sent: 17 December 2020 18:58
Reviewer: Martin Björklund Review result: Ready with Nits <snip> o Validation The module fails YANG validation, but that is really due to errors in [email protected]. Specifially, the leafref in the grouping "path-compute-info" must have prefixes in its path. Without prefixes, the path refers to nodes in the module that uses the grouping. (same for other groupings in that module). <tp> Martin, I am confused (which is why I will never be a YANG doctor:-(. RFC7950 p.104 says Identifiers appearing inside the grouping are resolved relative to the scope in which the grouping is defined, not where it is used. I recall much debate about paths and their resolution but I cannot find a statement that paths are resolved where they are used in RFC7950, nor in the many Errata. And while I find teas-te almost impossible to understand because of how it is structured, yet the elements in type leafref { path "/te/globals/named-path-constraints/" + "named-path-constraint/name"; } would all appear to be in teas-te and not imported from e.g. te-typesin, in which case prefix are not needed. So while I am sure you are right, and this is a significant problem, yet I cannot see the chapter and verse to back it up. In passing, this construct, in teas-yang-path-computation has a history of YANG difficulties. Tom petch /martin _______________________________________________ Teas mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
