I do not understand tree diagrams. My expectation is that the same YANG
should produce the same tree diagram but apparently not. I look at
RFC8519 and see
| | | +--:(tcp)
| | | | +--rw tcp {match-on-tcp}?
............
| | | +--rw source-port
| | | | | +--rw (source-port)?
| | | | | +--:(range-or-operator)
| | | | | +--rw (port-range-or-operator)?
but when imported into 'draft-ietf-opsawg-vpn-common-12' this becomes
| | +--:(tcp)
| | | +-- tcp
......
| | | +-- (source-port)?
| | | | +--:(source-port-range-or-operator)
| | | | +-- source-port-range-or-operator
ie the identifiers have gained a 'source' (or 'destination').
Also, the structure changes. Moving on, vpn-common has
| | +--:(tcp)
| | | +-- tcp
.....
| | | +-- (source-port)?
| | | | +--:(source-port-range-or-operator)
| | | | +-- source-port-range-or-operator
.......
| | | +-- (destination-port)?
| | | +--:(destination-port-range-or-operator)
| | | +-- destination-port-range-or-operator
which looks fine until this is imported into
'draft-ietf-opsawg-l3sm-l3nm-18' when it becomes
| | | | +--:(tcp)
| | | | | +--rw tcp
...................
| | | | | +--rw (source-port)?
| | | | | | +--:(source-port-range-or-operator)
| | | | | | +--rw source-port-range-or-operator
| | | | | | inet:port-number
| | | | | +--rw (destination-port)?
| | | | +--:(destination-port-range-or-operator)
| | | | | +--rw destination-port-range-or-operator
| | | | | +--rw (port-range-or-operator)?
'destination-port-range-or-operator' has moved and we now have
| | | | +--:(tcp)
| | | | +--:(destination-port-range-or-operator)
which does not look fine to me; how can this be?
Earlier drafts of l3nm did not have this feature.
Tom Petch
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
