Re: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis-07.txt

Ladislav Lhotka <lho...@nic.cz> wrote: > > > On 25 Sep 2015, at 13:41, Martin Bjorklund <m...@tail-f.com> wrote: > > > > Ladislav Lhotka <lho...@nic.cz> wrote: > >> Jernej Tuljak <jern...@mg-soft.si> writes: > >> > >>>

Re: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis-07.txt

Jernej Tuljak wrote: > Ladislav Lhotka je 23.9.2015 ob 14:29 napisal: > > Jernej Tuljak writes: > > > >> Ladislav Lhotka je 23.9.2015 ob 12:52 napisal: > On 23 Sep 2015, at 12:37, Jernej Tuljak wrote: > > Ladislav Lhotka

Re: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis-07.txt

Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > > > On 23 Sep 2015, at 12:37, Jernej Tuljak wrote: > > > > Ladislav Lhotka je 23.9.2015 ob 11:58 napisal: > >>> On 23 Sep 2015, at 11:45, Jernej Tuljak wrote: > >>> > >>> Section 7.21.5., the first bullet

Re: [netmod] opstate-reqs #3: Is there a requirement for asynchronous systems to provide a blocking config update?

Kent Watsen wrote: > > > This doesn't seem to be consistent with the rfc6241 section 5.1 that > > states: > > "The running configuration datastore holds the complete configuration > > currently active on the network device." > > Good catch! RFC 6241 appears to be

Re: [netmod] ACL Model 03 - ACL Type should be mandatory

Hi, See below for some clarifying questions. "Sterne, Jason (Jason)" wrote: > Hi all, > > I met with Dean at IETF93 and we agreed that I should send a > specific proposal to the list for this. Here it is: > >

Re: [netmod] Y60 - coexistence with YANG 1.0

Andy Bierman <a...@yumaworks.com> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 3:39 AM, Martin Bjorklund <m...@tail-f.com> wrote: > > > Ladislav Lhotka <lho...@nic.cz> wrote: > > > > > > > On 15 Sep 2015, at 15:54, Martin Bjorklund <m...@tail-f.com> w

Re: [netmod] Y60 - coexistence with YANG 1.0

Ladislav Lhotka <lho...@nic.cz> wrote: > > > On 15 Sep 2015, at 15:54, Martin Bjorklund <m...@tail-f.com> wrote: > > > > Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de> wrote: > >> On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 03:54:59PM +0200, Martin B

Re: [netmod] Y60 - coexistence with YANG 1.0

Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 03:54:59PM +0200, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > > > Sure. The use case is for example servers that implement ietf-ip > > (which imports ietf-interfaces), and ietf-interfaces.

Re: [netmod] Y60 - coexistence with YANG 1.0

Hi, Martin Bjorklund <m...@tail-f.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I think we agreed that is ok for a YANG 1.1 module to import a YANG > 1.0 module. > > But should it also be ok for a 1.0 module to import a 1.1 module? > > If we make this illegal, we might run into pro

Re: [netmod] Y60 - coexistence with YANG 1.0

Ladislav Lhotka <lho...@nic.cz> wrote: > Martin Bjorklund <m...@tail-f.com> writes: > > > Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de> wrote: > >> On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 03:19:14PM +0200, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > >> > Hi, >

Re: [netmod] Y60 - coexistence with YANG 1.0

Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 03:19:14PM +0200, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Martin Bjorklund <m...@tail-f.com> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > I think we agreed

Re: [netmod] YANG coordination feedback on draft-openconfig-netmod-opstate-01

Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 10:54:22AM +0100, Robert Wilton wrote: > > > > > >Then Lada brought up the example of ip addresses. It was mentioned > > >on the call that for ip addresses there would be three lists; one for > >

Re: [netmod] WebEx meeting invitation: NETMOD Interm meeting on OpenConfig: tomorrow meeting

Hi, Anees Shaikh <aasha...@google.com> wrote: > hi -- some additional comments inline. I think that the revisit on some of > the operator requirements is primarily due to some proposed solution's > inability to address them. > > On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 12:41 AM, Martin

Re: [netmod] WebEx meeting invitation: NETMOD Interm meeting on OpenConfig: tomorrow meeting

Hi, Benoit Claise wrote: > 2. The requirements. > If there are still clarifications needed around the requirements in > draft-openconfig-netmod-opstate-01 section 4 4.1. Applied configuration as part of operational state Already in the title, this requirement mandates the

Re: [netmod] posted: draft-kwatsen-netmod-opstate-00

Robert Wilton wrote: > Hi Kent, > > I've a few comments on draft-kwatsen-netmod-opstate-00: > > 1) Having a related-state statement seems to be a good solution for > binding oper nodes to config nodes that are not directly related in > the data tree. > > But I note that the

Re: [netmod] Y60 - coexistence with YANG 1.0

Ladislav Lhotka <lho...@nic.cz> wrote: > > > On 10 Sep 2015, at 13:45, Martin Bjorklund <m...@tail-f.com> wrote: > > > > Ladislav Lhotka <lho...@nic.cz> wrote: > >> > >>> On 10 Sep 2015, at 12:55, Martin Bjorklund <m...@tai

Re: [netmod] Y60 - coexistence with YANG 1.0

Ladislav Lhotka <lho...@nic.cz> wrote: > > > On 10 Sep 2015, at 12:55, Martin Bjorklund <m...@tail-f.com> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > I think we agreed that is ok for a YANG 1.1 module to import a YANG > > 1.0 module. > > > > B

[netmod] Y60 - coexistence with YANG 1.0

Hi, I think we agreed that is ok for a YANG 1.1 module to import a YANG 1.0 module. But should it also be ok for a 1.0 module to import a 1.1 module? If we make this illegal, we might run into problems. For example, ietf-ip imports ietf-interfaces. Suppose we update ietf-interfaces and the

Re: [netmod] Tomorrow's Interim Meeting Details

Hi, I got this, but there is no url to the webex there. Can you send the url? /martin Nadeau Thomas wrote: > >>> NETMOD Working Group invites you to join this WebEx meeting. > >>> > >>> NETMOD Interm meeting on OpenConfig > >>> Thursday, September 10, 2015 > >>>

Re: [netmod] data tree

Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > Hi, > > Andy argued that the proposed new definition of data tree looks like it > is a big tree containing everything, so here is another try, > improvements are welcome: > > o data tree: An instantiated tree of any data modeled with YANG, i.e., > one

Re: [netmod] Y26 again, sorry

Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > Robert Wilton writes: > > > Hi Andy, > > > > Picking up a slightly old thread after PTO ... > > > > On 24/08/2015 22:50, Andy Bierman wrote: > >> > >> > >> On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 2:24 PM, Robert Wilton >>

Re: [netmod] minutes of the NETMOD 2015-08-31 virtual interim meeting

Hi, Andy Bierman wrote: > I have a issue request for next week. > IMO the text for what an arbitrary "YANG tool" MUST, SHOULD, or MAY > do with an extension-stmt is not clear and no consensus exists yet either. > > The specific use-case is the addition of an "ephemeral-stmt"

Re: [netmod] minutes of the NETMOD 2015-08-31 virtual interim meeting

Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > On Fri, Sep 04, 2015 at 09:29:53AM -0700, Andy Bierman wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Is there a WEB page that lists all the upcoming virtual meetings? > > This would really help people remember without scanning lots of > >

Re: [netmod] logical systems model

Lou Berger <lber...@labn.net> wrote: > Martin, > > On 09/02/2015 06:42 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > Andy Bierman <a...@yumaworks.com> wrote: > >> On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Lou Berger <lber...@labn.net> wrote: > >>> Can one of you giv

Re: [netmod] logical systems model

Paul Borman wrote: > It depends on if you want to be able to just use YANG for schemas, or if > you want to force people to use another mechanism on top of YANG to make it > flexible enough for complete schemas. > > For example, an interfaces schema may end up with paths like

Re: [netmod] logical systems model

Andy Bierman wrote: > On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Lou Berger wrote: > > Can one of you give an example of how this word work for a device (which > > may be physical or virtual) that allocates done resources, say interfaces > > to one logical entity

Re: [netmod] Motivations for Structuring Models

the questions I'm asking are completely fair. Apologies. They're written from my perspective of problems I'm actually experiencing. Martin Bjorklund mailto:m...@tail-f.com August 27, 2015 at 15:45 1) As a consumer of YANG models, how do I identify the set of models that provide a set

Re: [netmod] Motivations for Structuring Models

Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote: Just because some people don't agree that the existing modules should be moved doesn't mean the NETMOD WG wants every module to create its own top-level node. I agree, but I would go one step further and say that just b/c we don't think that /device is a

Re: [netmod] Motivations for Structuring Models

Rob Shakir r...@rob.sh wrote: Martin, We are almost certainly not on the same page as to what we're debating. Martin Bjorklund mailto:m...@tail-f.com August 28, 2015 at 08:55 https://www.postbox-inc.com/?utm_source=emailutm_medium=sumlinkutm_campaign=reach Ok. So your proposal

Re: [netmod] Y34 - root node

Alexander Clemm (alex) a...@cisco.com wrote: - As Martin mentioned, clearly by allowing to mount you are decoupling schema information and instance population. Regarding the issue of validation, this can be addressed by several ways. I think that the mount point effectively works as a

Re: [netmod] LL review of 6020bis-06

Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote: Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com writes: ... 3. It's necessary to clearly separate properties of the data tree from properties of XML encoding. For instance, it is an inherent property of a container instance in the data

Re: [netmod] questions about draft-rtgyangdt-rtgwg-device-model-00

Nadeau Thomas tnad...@lucidvision.com wrote: [Speaking for myself] Is the resistance to this proposal because of the actual changes to structure, or is it a resistance to churn/change? The former. IMO this is technically not a good proposal, as I have tried to explain

Re: [netmod] Y26 again, sorry

Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote: On 25 Aug 2015, at 14:48, Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com wrote: Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote: On 25 Aug 2015, at 14:01, Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com wrote: Hi, I think this could work (thanks Robert; maybe this is what you

Re: [netmod] Y26 again, sorry

Hi, I think this could work (thanks Robert; maybe this is what you meant!): container zones { list zone { ... list rrset { ... leaf type { type identityref { ... } } list rdata { key id; ... choice

Re: [netmod] LL review of 6020bis-06

Hi Lada, Thank you for this extensive review! Comments inline. Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote: Hi, this time I reviewed the complete text so my comments aren't limited to YANG 1.1 stuff. Lada General comments 1. Would it make sense to at least mention that YANG is

Re: [netmod] Y26 again, sorry

Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote: On 25 Aug 2015, at 14:01, Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com wrote: Hi, I think this could work (thanks Robert; maybe this is what you meant!): container zones { list zone { ... list rrset { ... leaf type

Re: [netmod] Y26 again, sorry

Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote: On 24 Aug 2015, at 20:17, Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote: YANG does not provide any mechanism to REQUIRE modules A and B to both be implemented on a server. You may think it should, but currently the YANG conformance is for an individual

Re: [netmod] issue question: yang submodule contains newer revision than parent module

Martin Ciglan -X (mciglan - PANTHEON TECHNOLOGIES at Cisco) mcig...@cisco.com wrote: Hello I'm dealing with issue where one yang module includes many yang submodules. My question is if one of submodules gets updated with newer revision than parent module, does parent module needs to be

Re: [netmod] ODPOVEĎ: issue question: yang submodule contains newer revision than parent module

in parent module a to make it all valid? Thanks. Yes. /martin Best Regards Martin __ Od: Martin Bjorklund [m...@tail-f.com] Odoslané: 24. augusta 2015 10:00 Do: Martin Ciglan -X (mciglan - PANTHEON TECHNOLOGIES at Cisco) Kópia: netmod

Re: [netmod] Y34 - root node

Robert Wilton rwil...@cisco.com wrote: Hi Martin, On 20/08/2015 09:15, Martin Bjorklund wrote: Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote: On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 4:25 AM, Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com wrote: Robert Wilton rwil...@cisco.com wrote: On 18/08/2015 18:22, Andy Bierman

Re: [netmod] uses under choice

Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote: Hi, YANG 1.1 will allow 'choice' under 'choice (see issue Y29), but is there any reason for not allowing 'uses' under 'choice'? If you have a grouping with N nodes (N 1), expanding in directly under a choice would create N cases. Probably not what you

Re: [netmod] Y34 - root node

Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote: On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 4:25 AM, Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com wrote: Robert Wilton rwil...@cisco.com wrote: On 18/08/2015 18:22, Andy Bierman wrote: This is how languages like SMIv2 and YANG work. A conceptual object is given

Re: [netmod] extensions and conformance

Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote: Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com writes: Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote: On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 5:49 AM, Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com wrote: Hi, [joining this discussion a bit late] Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote

Re: [netmod] extensions and conformance

Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote: On 20 Aug 2015, at 13:12, Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com wrote: Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote: On 20 Aug 2015, at 12:37, Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com wrote: Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote: Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com

Re: [netmod] Y34 - root node

Robert Wilton rwil...@cisco.com wrote: On 18/08/2015 18:22, Andy Bierman wrote: This is how languages like SMIv2 and YANG work. A conceptual object is given a permanent home within the tree of object identifiers. Moving data is very expensive, since any clients working with the old

Re: [netmod] extensions and conformance

Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote: On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 5:49 AM, Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com wrote: Hi, [joining this discussion a bit late] Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote: On 10 Aug 2015, at 18:46, Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote: On Mon

Re: [netmod] questions about draft-rtgyangdt-rtgwg-device-model-00

Hi, Lou Berger lber...@labn.net wrote: On 8/18/2015 8:01 PM, Andy Bierman wrote: Q1) scope sec 2: The model organization can itself be thought of as a meta-model, in that it describes the relationships between individual models. We choose to represent it also as simple

Re: [netmod] Y26 again, sorry

Hi, Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote: Hi, although YANG 1.1 issue Y26 [1] is marked as DONE, I think the adopted solution Y26-02 is really horrible, so at least I want to make sure the WG is aware of the consequences. I am currently working on a data model for DNS zone data and the

Re: [netmod] Y26 again, sorry

Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote: On 18 Aug 2015, at 15:42, Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com wrote: Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote: On 18 Aug 2015, at 13:09, Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com wrote: Hi, Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote: Hi, although YANG

Re: [netmod] draft-openconfig-netmod-opstate: Changes in -01

Hi, Rob Shakir r...@rob.sh wrote: Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: But you are right, it is not just the path that is needed to identify data residing in configuration datastores. It is in general a tuple selector, path and for configuration data the selector is a configuration

Re: [netmod] new YANG 1.1 Issue Y61: I2RS support

Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote: On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 10:51 AM, Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com wrote: Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote: Hi, I understand the intent is that an implementation of NACM has to understand these NACM extensions. I agree with Lada

Re: [netmod] new YANG 1.1 Issue Y61: I2RS support

. So do you agree that it would be a good idea to clarify this according to Juergen's suggestion? /martin Andy On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com wrote: Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote: The real difference is that extensions can be ignored

Re: [netmod] new YANG 1.1 Issue Y61: I2RS support

Hi, Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote: On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 12:16 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de wrote: On Sat, Jul 25, 2015 at 05:17:11PM -0700, Andy Bierman wrote: Hi, I would like to open another issue for YANG 1.1, because I don't want

Re: [netmod] new YANG 1.1 Issue Y61: I2RS support

Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote: On 28 Jul 2015, at 11:42, Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com wrote: Hi, Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote: On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 12:16 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de wrote: On Sat, Jul 25, 2015 at 05

Re: [netmod] Open Config Options

Hi, Nadeau Thomas tnad...@lucidvision.com wrote: One of the actions from the last Interim meeting was to have both sides of the issues around the open config approach to create at least slides/textual bullet points for use during our discussion in Praha so we can

Re: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis-06.txt

Configuration Protocol (NETCONF) Author : Martin Bjorklund Filename: draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis-06.txt Pages : 196 Date: 2015-07-06 Abstract: YANG is a data modeling language used to model configuration and state data

Re: [netmod] IANA Consideration

Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote: On 30 Jun 2015, at 16:11, Acee Lindem (acee) a...@cisco.com wrote: Hi Lada, On 6/30/15, 4:52 AM, Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote: Hi, is it OK that 6020bis again defines “YANG Module Names” registry? It was already defined in RFC

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-netmod-yang-metadata-01 (until 2015-06-29)

Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote: On 01 Jul 2015, at 16:25, Benoit Claise bcla...@cisco.com wrote: Hi Lada, ay - The set of annotations must be extensible in a distributed manner so as to allow for defining new annotations without running into the risk

Re: [netmod] Y45-04 and ietf-yang-library

Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote: On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 1:44 AM, Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com wrote: Hi, Here's a short summary, and then some questions for the WG. The ietf-yang-library module is designed to serve two purposes: 1. A protocol-independent

Re: [netmod] Y45-04 and ietf-yang-library

Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote: On Sat, Jun 27, 2015 at 1:19 AM, Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com wrote: Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote: On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 1:59 AM, Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com wrote: Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote: On Wed, Jun

Re: [netmod] Y35: allow empty in union

Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote: On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 11:55 AM, Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com wrote: Juergen Schoenwaelder j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de wrote: On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 05:11:28PM +0200, Martin Bjorklund wrote: Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote

Re: [netmod] Y45-04 and ietf-yang-library

Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote: On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 1:59 AM, Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com wrote: Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 2:14 PM, Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com wrote: Hi, I am preparing a new version of draft-ietf

Re: [netmod] Y45-04 and ietf-yang-library

Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote: On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 12:37 PM, Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com wrote: Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote: . There is already the schema list in ietf-netconf-monitoring that gives you the full set of modules and submodules used

Re: [netmod] Y45-04 and ietf-yang-library

Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote: . There is already the schema list in ietf-netconf-monitoring that gives you the full set of modules and submodules used in a server. This is not true. --ro schemas | +--ro schema* [identifier version format] |

Re: [netmod] Y45-04 and ietf-yang-library

Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote: On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 1:14 AM, Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com wrote: Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 2:14 PM, Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com wrote: Hi, I am preparing a new version of draft-ietf

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-netmod-yang-metadata-01 (until 2015-06-29)

Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote: On 17 Jun 2015, at 12:12, Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com wrote: Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote: Hi Martin, thanks for the review. Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com writes: o Last paragraph of section 3 and the description

Re: [netmod] review of draft-openconfig-netmod-opstate-00

Hi, Kent Watsen kwat...@juniper.net wrote: [As an individual contributor] In preparation for our Virtual Interim meeting this Thursday, my primary goal was to understand the problems needing to be solved. Hopefully this isn't too much of a simplification, but there seems to be just the

Re: [netmod] anydata

Juergen Schoenwaelder j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de wrote: On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 09:05:07AM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: It is also important for the JSON encoding - it means there won’t necessarily be a way for mapping XML-encoded instance to JSON and vice versa. Because of

Re: [netmod] Fwd: Re: Leafref and require-instance=false

Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote: Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com writes: On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 8:39 AM, Kent Watsen kwat...@juniper.net wrote: I think the two leafs are coupled through the path statement and so the values of both should conform to the same type. If I extend

Re: [netmod] Fwd: Re: Leafref and require-instance=false

Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote: On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 8:39 AM, Kent Watsen kwat...@juniper.net wrote: I think the two leafs are coupled through the path statement and so the values of both should conform to the same type. If I extend Balazs¹ example with uint8 and 1..10 range:

Re: [netmod] A question about updating model

David Reid r...@snmp.com wrote: Hi all, If I want to add a new child data node to a container node or list node, in order to keep backward compatiable, should this child node be added to the end of son nodes of parent node? For example, container a { leaf b;

Re: [netmod] VRFY :45: better conformance mechanism

Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote: Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com writes: Andy, I don't think the implementation burden on the server is that heavy. A YANG 1.0 compliant server today supports: leaf a in module A of type foo from foo@2001-01-01 leaf b in module B of type

<    5   6   7   8   9   10