This is discussed in section 1 of draft-ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis-06.txt.
/js
On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 01:56:14AM +, Qin Wu wrote:
> Juergen:
> One stupid question I have is, What about the old client and server still
> support YANG 1.0 since RFC7895bis is designed to replaces RFC7895?
> Do we
On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 05:21:29AM +, Rohit R Ranade wrote:
>
> Also what does it mean that state-modules have been "implemented" in the
> data-store ?
>
The server implemented an empty set of objects. No client should have
an issue with that and a server may choose to report this (for
Hi, WG:
We have made an update Documentation Conventions for Expressing YANG in XML I-D
based on last meeting discussion.
The changes include:
1. Add JSON support.
2. Add objectives section
3. Consolidate Mandatory Boilerplate for both leaf node and metadata annotation.
4. Move complex case to
On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 03:58:33PM +, Kent Watsen wrote:
> [resurrecting this thread]
>
> Currently the zerotouch draft has a normative reference to this draft.
> I will this week post an update to the zerotouch draft to resolve the
> netconf list thread "a couple zerotouch-21 issues". It
[resurrecting this thread]
Currently the zerotouch draft has a normative reference to this draft.
I will this week post an update to the zerotouch draft to resolve the
netconf list thread "a couple zerotouch-21 issues". It would be easy
for me to also switch back to using rc:yang-data, but I
> Co-authors, if you agree, how do we track this?
As co-author, I agree and view it as an editorial update.
As co-chair, I recommend the authors commit the fix to
GitHub now and wait for AD and/or IESG reviews to trigger
an update that it will get swept into. I don't think that
it's worth
Yes, this is why we have draft-ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis-06.txt.
/js
On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 11:27:42AM +, Rohit R Ranade wrote:
> Hi Juergen,
>
> Consider a device supports a dynamic data-store called "ephemeral". Consider
> Yang-library 1.1 is NOT implemented in device.
> Consider device
Hi Rohit,
On 29/05/2018 10:35, Rohit R Ranade wrote:
Hi All,
Consider the below YANG tree, which contains both “rw” and “ro” nodes.
module: ietf-interfaces
+--rw interfaces
| +--rw interface* [name]
| +--rw name string
| +--rw description?
