Hi,

"Jason Sterne (Nokia)" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Martin,
> 
> If a "description" of a leaf (without a default statement) changes from this:
> 
>       "the absence of this leaf causes the protocol to stay administratively 
> down"
> 
> to this:
> 
>       "the absence of this leaf causes the protocol to go administratively up"
> 
> (with no other changes in the YANG) then IMO it *is* an NBC
> change. The behavior described in a "description" field is
> considered part of the model/API (I've seen many references &
> examples of this over the years in NETMOD/NETCONF discussions).

Absolutely.

But that's not what we disuss in this case.  In this case we have
a leaf that shows "unknown bits", and neither the type nor the leaf
(including descriptions) change during the upgrade.



/martin



> 
> Maybe it becomes more subtle if that behavior change isn't documented in the 
> "description" statement (I'd argue it is still NBC if the server changes that 
> behavior and they should be publishing a new revision of the YANG model/API), 
> but I was proposing that it should in this case.
> 
> Jason
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Martin Björklund <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Friday, April 14, 2023 4:39 AM
> > To: Jason Sterne (Nokia) <[email protected]>
> > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: [netmod] Unknown bits - backwards compatibility
> > 
> > 
> > CAUTION: This is an external email. Please be very careful when clicking 
> > links or
> > opening attachments. See the URL nok.it/ext for additional information.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I am quite confused after reading this thread, so I had to go back to
> > this first message:
> > 
> > "Jason Sterne (Nokia)" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > Hi Jeff,
> > >
> > > One topic that came up during the IETF 116 NETMOD meeting was
> > > backwards compatibility.
> > >
> > > >From what I understand, a leaf (e.g. unknown-flags) that uses the
> > > >unknown-bits typedef would never change its definition in YANG. It
> > > >would always be defined as unknown-bits with all 64 bit definitions
> > > >even as more and more bits become "known".  *But* the system would
> > > >suddenly stop reporting bit-0, then bit-1 in that unknown-flags leaf
> > > >as those bits become known.
> > >
> > > Strictly speaking, that should probably be considered an NBC change
> > 
> > Nothing has changed in the data model, so there is no way to mark the
> > _data model_ as NBC.
> > 
> > The server follows the data model, and reports which bits it doesn't
> > understand.  With software updates, this may change over time.  This
> > is simply the semantics of this state leaf.
> > 
> > 
> > /martin

_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

Reply via email to