Hi,I would just like to explicitly mention that the current YANG library does not allow to report features for non-implemented modules and the feature list is in a grouping called `module-implementation-parameters`[1] so it would seem the authors of that RFC thought one must implement a module to enable its features.
Regards, Michal [1] https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8525#page-11 On 9. 5. 2022 19:43, Kent Watsen wrote:
YANG Doctors,
Does "foo" need to be "implemented", in order for its feature to be define?
module foo {
yang-version 1.1;
namespace "https://example.net/foo";;
prefix "f";
feature foo-feature;
...
}
Specifically, using the previous YANG Library (RFC 7895), would this be
possible:
{
"name": "foo",
"feature": [
"foo-feature"
],
"namespace": "https://example.net/foo";,
"conformance-type": "import"
},
Or does "foo" also need to be "implemented", in order for its feature to be
defined?
PS: the answer to this impacts the "crypto-types and friends" drafts in the
NETCONF WG, where it is assumed (and various tools agreed, sans a recent change in
`yanglint`) that the implementation-status of a module is orthogonal to what features
supported.
Thanks,
Kent
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
