Hi Andy, >> Legacy clients are failing offline validation today. If running config has a >> leafref to system config, and <get-config> doesn't return that system config >> (which it doesn't in some implementations), then the instance data returned >> to the client doesn't validate against the YANG model. These >> implementations don't have an explicit <system> datastore today (but they do >> have these internal semi-hidden referenceable list entries). > > > > This is an implementation bug. > YANG validation for configuration data nodes is very clear. > It intentionally does not allow any leafrefs to point at data nodes outside > <running>. > Vendors who follow these YANG rules can return a representation of <running> > that can be validated.
lol “junos-defaults” existed before YANG was a thing ;) In either case, 3 of the top-5(?) vendors are doing this, not out of spite, but because business-demands... Andy, how does YumaWorks handle shared-objects, such as those Jason and I have described? Do your customers populate them in <running>? If so, is there an “immutable” flag to prevent delation? K.
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
