On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 05:34:41PM +0000, Italo Busi wrote:
> Juergen,
> 
> I think you have got the problem: "a data model author thought the default is 
> always 0 and later he/she realizes that in some contexts the default should 
> be something different"
> 
> Unless I am missing something, creating a new leaf (e.g., foo-new) would 
> confuse an existing client.

No, it does not confuse the client, the client will ignore it.
 
> For example, within the operational DS, the value of foo will be set to 0 (as 
> per YANG default statement) while the value of foo-new will be set to 10, 
> which represents the actual value in use by the system.

Yes, a new implementation will have to declare that it does not
implement foo.
 
> Now, the existing client, which is not aware of foo-new, when reading the 
> value of foo in the operational DS will incorrectly think that the actual 
> value in use by the system is 0 rather than 10.

A client reading <operational> knows the value in use. But clients do
not have to real operational.

> Am I missing anything?
> 
> Instead, if we can find a magic way to apply the value 10 to foo within the 
> operational DS, the existing client can read the value of foo in the 
> operational DS and correctly understand that the actual value in use by the 
> system is 10 (even if this is not the default value of foo).

In general, you can't assume that clients read operational. I can't
judge the specific circumstances but in traditional NC/RC, a default
statement can be interpreted as "assume the default value is in force
if this lead is not configured" (unless the client uses RFC 6243
report-all). If all clients are in an NMDA world, the issue is much
smaller - it is reduced to "does the client believe the server has a
bug or not". But even then, I continue to believe that a leaf changing
the semantics of another leaf is bad design.

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <https://www.jacobs-university.de/>

_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

Reply via email to