On Tue, Jun 23, 2026 at 8:49 AM Vojtech Vilimek <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi netmod, > > I found an inconsistency in the RFC 7950: YANG 1.1, see below. > > Section 7.1.5 The "import" statement, 3rd paragraph: > When the optional "revision-date" substatement is present, any > typedef, grouping, extension, feature, and identity referenced by > definitions in the local module are taken from the specified revision > of the imported module. It is an error if the specified revision of > the imported module does not exist. If no "revision-date" > substatement is present, it is undefined from which revision of the > module they are taken. > > Section 5.6.5 Implemening a Module, 5th paragraph: > If a server lists a module C in the "/modules-state/module" list from > "ietf-yang-library" and there are other modules Ms listed that import > C without specifying the revision date of module C, the server MUST > use the definitions from the most recent revision of C listed for > modules Ms. > > > The revision could not be undefined and the most recent at the same > time. The MUST in overview section make things easier. I want to file > an erratum but before that I am open for discussion.
Having a clear rule is desireable, and it already exists as you state. I would expect to take the statements from the latest available YANG module on the system if not stating which version to import explicitly. -- Per _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
