On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 05:22:16AM +0000, Mohideen, Kaja (Nokia - IN/Chennai) wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jürgen Schönwälder <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 1:34 AM > To: Mohideen, Kaja (Nokia - IN/Chennai) <[email protected]> > Cc: NetMod WG <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 (6885) > > On Thu, Mar 17, 2022 at 07:11:36AM +0000, Mohideen, Kaja (Nokia - IN/Chennai) > wrote: > > 1/ I understand that clients may/may-not be yang aware, not using > > hello/yang-lib and may have hard-coded requests, response processing to get > > its job done using the server. Such a client when encountering ‘unknown’ > > nodes can either fail or ignore those nodes. It’s the client choice. But, > > with expanded range of ‘enum and bits’, there is no choice but to fail as > > the ‘value’ is now unknown. OK. > > > > I do not agree that an expanded value space necessarily implies that clients > have to fail. > > [R Kaja Mohideen] What else the client can do? How can the client map the new > value to one of the old values it recognize? Whatever the scenario the client > is trying to get done, at least the specific step cannot be considered > 'successful'. >
It depends on the semantics of the type/leaf, there is no generic answer or mapping rule that does the right thing. Yes, multiple clients configuring the same parts of a data model on a server using different versions of the data model is not trivial (but such a scenario is by design not trivial). /js -- Jürgen Schönwälder 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
