On Thu, Jul 08, 2021 at 09:30:27AM +0000, Rob Wilton (rwilton) wrote:
> It is perhaps worth noting that the NETCONF copy-config allows for the 
> configuration to be specified using any URI, but the server capabilities 
> announce which URI schemes are supported.
> 
> Hence, I think that it is okay for the YANG model to use URI, but I think the 
> draft, and data node description should constrain the URI schemes that 
> allowed (perhaps file:// and https://).  This would allow support for future 
> URI schemes to be added in a future revision of the YANG instance data 
> module, if required.
>

I think it is not "allowed" but "mandatory to implement". We should
allow implementations to support an ftps:// scheme as long as there
is a common baseline.

/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