Re: [OPSAWG] draft-ietf-opsawg-mud: YANG validation

Thu, 21 Sep 2017 15:18:15 -0700

I have fixed these warning. Eliot, I am including the updated ACL models. Can you verify?

These changes will be uploaded as part of the next update that Sonal is planning to post on Oct. 2.

Attachment: [email protected]
Description: Binary data

Attachment: [email protected]
Description: Binary data

Attachment: [email protected]
Description: Binary data



On Sep 13, 2017, at 2:15 AM, Benoit Claise <[email protected]> wrote:

Dear draft-ietf-opsawg-mud authors,

A new version of the draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model has been posted, and it now passes validation. It failed previously with:
    /[email protected]:118: warning: The 'must' _expression_ will fail: the node 'upper-port' from module 'ietf-access-control-list' (in node 'operation' from 'ietf-access-control-list') is not found
./[email protected]:118: warning: The 'must' _expression_ will fail: the node 'lower-port' from module 'ietf-access-control-list' (in node 'operation' from 'ietf-access-control-list') is not found
    ...

As a consequence, this error is not reported any longer in the draft-ietf-opsawg-mud YANG models.
However, there are still some errors:
warn: Value "eth-acl" is not valid for the node "acl-type" (acl-type = 'eth-acl').
warn: Value "ipv4-acl" is not valid for the node "acl-type" (acl-type = 'ipv4-acl').
warn: Value "ipv6-acl" is not valid for the node "acl-type" (acl-type = 'ipv6-acl').
warn: Value "mixed-l2-l3-ipv4-acl" is not valid for the node "acl-type" (acl-type = 'mixed-l2-l3-ipv4-acl').
warn: Value "mixed-l2-l3-ipv6-acl" is not valid for the node "acl-type" (acl-type = 'mixed-l2-l3-ipv6-acl').
warn: Value "mixed-l2-l3-ipv4-ipv6-acl" is not valid for the node "acl-type" (acl-type = 'mixed-l2-l3-ipv4-ipv6-acl').
warn: Value "any-acl" is not valid for the node "acl-type" (acl-type = 'any-acl').

warn: Value "eth-acl" is not valid for the node "acl-type" (acl-type = 'eth-acl').
warn: Value "ipv4-acl" is not valid for the node "acl-type" (acl-type = 'ipv4-acl').
warn: Value "ipv6-acl" is not valid for the node "acl-type" (acl-type = 'ipv6-acl').
warn: Value "mixed-l2-l3-ipv4-acl" is not valid for the node "acl-type" (acl-type = 'mixed-l2-l3-ipv4-acl').
warn: Value "mixed-l2-l3-ipv6-acl" is not valid for the node "acl-type" (acl-type = 'mixed-l2-l3-ipv6-acl').
warn: Value "mixed-l2-l3-ipv4-ipv6-acl" is not valid for the node "acl-type" (acl-type = 'mixed-l2-l3-ipv4-ipv6-acl').
warn: Value "any-acl" is not valid for the node "acl-type" (acl-type = 'any-acl').
See http://www.claise.be/IETFYANGPageCompilation.html

Please correct those mistakes and post a new version.

Also, make sure both revisions match (for all your YANG modules in the draft) and are up to date
   <CODE BEGINS>file "[email protected]"
   module ietf-acldns {
     yang-version 1.1;
     namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-acldns";
     prefix "ietf-acldns";

    revision "2016-07-20" {
       description "Base version of dnsname extension of ACL model";
       reference "RFC XXXX: Manufacturer Usage Description
                  Specification";
     }

While this revision mismatch seems like a minor thing, this is a pain from a tooling point of view (as we need to index YANG modules per name, revision, organization)
We discovered that version 8 contains a newer revision than the version 9. That confused our tooling.
version 8:
   <CODE BEGINS>file "[email protected]"

   ...

     revision "2017-07-03" {
       description "Clone across IP ACL types.";
       reference "RFC XXXX: Manufacturer Usage Description
                  Specification";
     }

  
version 9: 
   <CODE BEGINS>file "[email protected]"

   ...

     revision "2016-07-20" {
       description "Base version of dnsname extension of ACL model";
       reference "RFC XXXX: Manufacturer Usage Description
                  Specification";
     }
All these metadata are important.
We're working on: https://www.yangcatalog.org/yang-search/module_details.php?module=ietf-acldns
Also, is your YANG module NMDA compliant? It reports tree-type as "unclassified".

Regards, Benoit

Mahesh Jethanandani



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

Reply via email to