[netmod] unresolved module prefixes in grouping definitions

Hi, Should YANG validation fail if a module defines a grouping that contains unresolved module prefix or should this generate only warning. In case the grouping is not instantiated that is. For example ietf-netconf-cli...@2022-05-24.yang does not import ietf-keystore and has no prefix

Re: [netmod] WGLC on draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6991-bis-11

On 18/02/2022 18.11, Andy Bierman wrote: On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 8:39 AM Martin Björklund > wrote: Hi, I didn't find any discussion about the new percent types in the list archives.  Do we really need three types for percent?  We can now express

Re: [netmod] [bmwg] WG Adoption Call for draft-vassilev-bmwg-network-interconnect-tester-06

On 09/09/2021 12.05, tom petch wrote: From: bmwg on behalf of MORTON JR., AL Sent: 08 September 2021 14:35 BMWG: A WG Adoption Call for the Internet-Draft on A YANG Data Model for Network Interconnect Tester Management draft-vassilev-bmwg-network-interconnect-tester-06

Re: [netmod] Murray Kucherawy's No Objection on draft-ietf-netmod-geo-location-08: (with COMMENT)

- makerspace in Oslo. /Vladimir On 20/05/2021 11.33, Vladimir Vassilev wrote: On 20/05/2021 10.43, Christian Hopps wrote: Murray Kucherawy via Datatracker writes: I support Lars' and Francesca's DISCUSS positions. The shepherd writeup says: "There are no known implementations know

Re: [netmod] Murray Kucherawy's No Objection on draft-ietf-netmod-geo-location-08: (with COMMENT)

On 20/05/2021 10.43, Christian Hopps wrote: Murray Kucherawy via Datatracker writes: I support Lars' and Francesca's DISCUSS positions. The shepherd writeup says: "There are no known implementations known to the Shepherd.  No vendors have indicated their plan to implement the

Re: [netmod] Compatibility of config=false data

On 21/04/2021 17.10, Andy Bierman wrote: IMO mandatory-stmt has no meaning for config=false. This is not spelled out in the current version of YANG. Instead one can assume that using config=false, mandatory=false leafs is the correct way to model optional information fields. There is

Re: [netmod] warn: Module's revisions are not unique (2018-06-28).

On 17/03/2021 19.21, Andy Bierman wrote: On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 8:36 AM Vladimir Vassilev <mailto:vladi...@lightside-instruments.com>> wrote: On 16/03/2021 13.36, Vladimir Vassilev wrote: > Hei, > > Many drafts and RFCs are flagged with warnings by the tracker

Re: [netmod] warn: Module's revisions are not unique (2018-06-28).

On 16/03/2021 13.36, Vladimir Vassilev wrote: Hei, Many drafts and RFCs are flagged with warnings by the tracker validation tools: ... yanglint SO 1.6.7: yanglint --verbose -p {tmplib} -p {rfclib} -p {draftlib} -p {ianalib} -p {cataloglib} {model} -i: warn: Module's revisions

[netmod] warn: Module's revisions are not unique (2018-06-28).

Hei, Many drafts and RFCs are flagged with warnings by the tracker validation tools: ... yanglint SO 1.6.7: yanglint --verbose -p {tmplib} -p {rfclib} -p {draftlib} -p {ianalib} -p {cataloglib} {model} -i: warn: Module's revisions are not unique (2018-06-28). ... Does anyone know what

Re: [netmod] submodules the hidden benefits

On 06/08/2020 00.43, Mahesh Jethanandani wrote: A contrarian view: I find the use of sub-modules helpful when I want to use separate files to maintain part of the module that is logically separate, while maintaining/restricting the use of them to a single namespace. The fact that tools

Re: [netmod] submodules the hidden benefits

On 05/08/2020 18.48, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: I personally meanwhile believe that sub-modules add complexity with little extra value but this view surely is not shared by others. +1. IMO removing sub-modules from YANG 2.0 should be on the list of proposed changes. /Vladimir

Re: [netmod] rfc6991bis: yang:xpath1.0

On 17/07/2020 21.14, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: - How do we deal with xpath expressions in other encodings such as JSON. Do we assume an xpath context populated with module names such that module names can be used to qualify path expressions. This may need discussion and/or a new definition.

Re: [netmod] JSON to XML lossy conversion

On 17/07/2020 09.11, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: On 17. 07. 20 8:57, Michal Vaško wrote: Hi Carsten, you had an interesting idea to have tools that could warn about these problems (although that is hardly a proper solution) but it is not really possible because the problem may occur whenever

Re: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6991-bis-03.txt

Hi, This version (-03) of the draft has not updated the ietf-yang-ty...@2019-11-04.yang module name while the revision is updated to 2020-06-26 (same goes for ietf-inet-types). This causes the ietf.org validation to fail for all active drafts that directly or indirectly import

Re: [netmod] hex-string as built-in type in future versions of YANG

On 06/11/2019 15.10, Schönwälder, Jürgen wrote: > On Wed, Nov 06, 2019 at 01:29:41PM +0000, Vladimir Vassilev wrote: >> [2] Some of the types are based on strings with complex lexical >> representation with canonical form specified in description statement >> which is

[netmod] hex-string as built-in type in future versions of YANG

Moving a netmod relevant topic from a thread on the bmwg mailing list https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bmwg/GwkVykKmOX7DFokCFynJVy_ZwZ8 On 29/10/2019 13.32, tom petch wrote: > Picking up the point below about vlan, this is where the IETF is not > doing the job it might. 'vlan' appears in

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-intf-ext-yang-07

/netmod-wg/interface-extensions-yang/issues -Original Message- From: netmod On Behalf Of Vladimir Vassilev Sent: 13 August 2019 17:05 To: Kent Watsen ; netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-intf-ext-yang-07 I have reviewed the draft. I have the following (19

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-intf-ext-yang-07

I have reviewed the draft. I have the following (19) IMO useful proposals: 1. Dedicated module (ietf-if-oper-status-debounce.yang) for the oper-status debouncing/dampening functionality currently in ietf-interfaces-common.yang. 2. In sec "3.1 Carrier delay" use of the under-defined "Carrier"

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-intf-ext-yang-07

On 11/08/2019 13.50, Rob Wilton (rwilton) wrote: Hi Vladimir, Thanks for the comments. Regarding increasing the L2 MTU if 802.1Q tags are present, this is because of how IEEE 802.3 defines the MTU of an Ethernet interface (at least for a single 802.1Q tag). Where does IEEE 802.3 define "MTU

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-intf-ext-yang-07

On 07/08/2019 16.14, Rob Wilton (rwilton) wrote: Hi Acee, Thanks. This was also discussed in the NETMOD WG meeting (I know that you had a conflict). My reading of the consensus in the room was that the histogram statistics should be deferred at this time. In particular, it seems like it

Re: [netmod] Question regarding RFC 8344

On 7/11/19 7:04 PM, Peter Schneider wrote: Hi, I stumbled on an incompatibility between the IP Management YANG Module and the real world: In the 'container ipv4', the leaf 'mtu' is declared as uint16 in the range 68..max, which is effective the range 68..65535, as noted in rfc 7950

Re: [netmod] xpath expressions in JSON

Hi, Seems this discussion affects 10 draft modules using the xpath1.0 type. The proposed boilerplate description text that was not added to some RFC modules like ietf-netconf-monitor...@2010-10-04.yang should be as consistent as possible (or skipped based on the ietf-netconf-monitoring

Re: [netmod] Review comments for module-tags-02

Hi, Adding  -state modules to all new drafts seems like unnecessary overhead. Even mentioning NMDA in a draft that has no logical relationship to NMDA also seems like unnecessary overhead. Not a great set of alternatives. The positive thing is that vendors that do not have to worry about

Re: [netmod] xpath expressions in JSON

On 10/15/18 4:25 PM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: Martin Bjorklund writes: Ladislav Lhotka wrote: On Wed, 2018-10-10 at 19:23 -0700, Andy Bierman wrote: On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 6:59 PM, Reshad Rahman (rrahman) wrote: On 2018-10-10, 9:59 AM, "netmod on behalf of Martin Bjorklund" <

Re: [netmod] xpath expressions in JSON

On 10/11/18 11:43 AM, Vladimir Vassilev wrote: +1. This is one of the two necessary changes to make the instance-identifier type canonical. Proposed changes RFC 7950: OLD: 9.13.2.  Lexical Representation    An instance-identifier value is lexically represented as a string.    All node

Re: [netmod] xpath expressions in JSON

On 10/11/18 11:21 AM, Andy Bierman wrote: So you must mean the full module name will be used at every node:   /ietf-interfaces:interfaces/ietf-interfaces:interface[ietf-interfaces:name='eth0'] Length is the only real problem I see with the solution. The lexical representation of

Re: [netmod] xpath expressions in JSON

On 10/11/18 8:39 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: Andy Bierman wrote: On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 6:59 PM, Reshad Rahman (rrahman) wrote: On 2018-10-10, 9:59 AM, "netmod on behalf of Martin Bjorklund" < netmod-boun...@ietf.org on behalf of m...@tail-f.com> wrote: Ladislav Lhotka wrote:

Re: [netmod] YANG versioning requirements

Hi Robert, On 10/3/18 11:44 AM, Robert Wilton wrote: Hi Vladimir, At IETF 102, when I was presenting on the YANG versioning requirements (draft-verdt-netmod-yang-versioning-reqs-00), I think you raised a concern about requirement 2.2: 2.2 A mechanism SHOULD be defined to determine whether

Re: [netmod] [Detnet] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-vassilev-netmod-network-bridge-00.txt

ous bridge scheduling mechanisms. Best regards, Janos On 7/17/2018 4:26 PM, Vladimir Vassilev wrote: Hi, I have submitted a draft https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-vassilev-netmod-network-bridge/ that proposes a model for network bridge management based on the concept of flows. The m

[netmod] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-vassilev-netmod-network-bridge-00.txt

Notification for draft-vassilev-netmod-network-bridge-00.txt Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2018 22:04:06 -0700 From: internet-dra...@ietf.org To: Vladimir Vassilev A new version of I-D, draft-vassilev-netmod-network-bridge-00.txt has been successfully submitted by Vladimir Vassilev and posted to the IETF

Re: [netmod] choice/case in tree diagrams

On 03/05/2018 06:40 PM, Per Hedeland wrote: On 2018-03-05 16:06, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: On Mon, 2018-03-05 at 15:49 +0100, Per Hedeland wrote: On 2018-03-05 15:41, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: On Mon, 2018-03-05 at 15:26 +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote: Juergen Schoenwaelder

Re: [netmod] choice/case in tree diagrams

On 03/05/2018 02:54 PM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de> wrote: On Mon, Mar 05, 2018 at 02:14:26PM +0100, Vladimir Vassilev wrote: On 03/05/2018 01:50 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: I prefer that the choice/case nodes do not ha

Re: [netmod] choice/case in tree diagrams

On 03/05/2018 01:50 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: I prefer that the choice/case nodes do not have any flags since they are not having a config true/false property on their own. And less clutter is better. 'choice' statements have 'config' substatement while 'case' do not. I myself figured

Re: [netmod] Adoption Poll: draft-rtgyangdt-netmod-module-tags-02

On 02/07/2018 11:02 PM, Andy Bierman wrote: Hi, Many good points. IMO it will be difficult to agree on the details of this draft without agreeing on the problem statement first. As a process issue, this seems like an important step. +1 It is usually handled with WG charter text, but NETMOD

Re: [netmod] [Netconf] LC of NDMA NETCONF/RESTCONF drafts

version of the draft. Forwarded Message Subject: [netmod] validation of draft-ietf-netconf-nmda-netconf-01 Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2017 19:48:49 +0100 From:     Vladimir Vassilev <vladi...@transpacket.com> To: netmod@ietf.org <netmod@ietf.org> Hello, There is a va

Re: [netmod] WGLC - draft-ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams

On 01/16/2018 09:06 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 08:19:38PM +0100, Vladimir Vassilev wrote: As for the automated validation of the tree diagrams as an added value to the human readability I have the following thoughts. I would like to be able to compare unlimited

Re: [netmod] WGLC - draft-ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams

On 01/16/2018 06:34 PM, joel jaeggli wrote: On 1/16/18 8:01 AM, Robert Wilton wrote: On 16/01/2018 15:40, Martin Bjorklund wrote: Vladimir Vassilev <vladi...@transpacket.com> wrote: Does anyone else have an opinion on this?  I can see three alternatives:    1) allow any

Re: [netmod] WGLC - draft-ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams

On 01/16/2018 11:56 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: Vladimir Vassilev <vladi...@transpacket.com> wrote: Hi, I have reviewed and implemented (apart from schema mount specific functionality) draft-ietfetf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams-04 and found the following issues: ==sec 2.6.  Node Represen

Re: [netmod] WGLC - draft-ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams

On 01/15/2018 09:41 PM, Vladimir Vassilev wrote: Hi, I have reviewed and implemented (apart from schema mount specific functionality) draft-ietfetf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams-04 and found the following issues: ==sec 2.6.  Node Representation== 1. To correctly reflect the current pyang

Re: [netmod] WGLC - draft-ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams

Hi, I have reviewed and implemented (apart from schema mount specific functionality) draft-ietfetf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams-04 and found the following issues: ==sec 2.6.  Node Representation== 1. To correctly reflect the current pyang output one needs to add '--' between and . OLD:    

Re: [netmod] AD review: draft-ietf-netmod-revised-datastores-08

On 12/21/2017 02:20 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 02:03:45PM +0100, Vladimir Vassilev wrote: On 12/21/2017 11:34 AM, Robert Wilton wrote: Hi Vladimir, First point of clarification is that this is not about running/intended at all.  The contents of running/intended

Re: [netmod] AD review: draft-ietf-netmod-revised-datastores-08

A couple of further comments inline below as well ... On 20/12/2017 21:44, Vladimir Vassilev wrote: Hello, On 12/20/2017 05:40 PM, Benoit Claise wrote: Dear all, In order not to be the bottleneck in the process and assuming that the document will be in "publication requested" pret

Re: [netmod] AD review: draft-ietf-netmod-revised-datastores-08

Hello, On 12/20/2017 05:40 PM, Benoit Claise wrote: Dear all, In order not to be the bottleneck in the process and assuming that the document will be in "publication requested" pretty soon, here is my AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-revised-datastores-08 - 5.3.2. Missing

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8022bis-01

On 12/17/2017 05:57 PM, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote: Hi Lou, et al, The only issue we are struggling with is whether we need to specify the version in the ietf-interfaces import. We have noted that draft-ietf-netmod-rfc7277bis-01.txt does not import by revision. We also have so nits: 1.

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-rfc7277bis-00

On 12/16/2017 10:46 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: Hi, Vladimir Vassilev <vladi...@transpacket.com> wrote: On 12/13/2017 04:26 PM, Vladimir Vassilev wrote: Hi, On 12/13/2017 03:47 PM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: Hi, Thanks for reporting this.  I'll add the missing origin.  But why did you

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-rfc7277bis-00

On 12/13/2017 04:26 PM, Vladimir Vassilev wrote: Hi, On 12/13/2017 03:47 PM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: Hi, Thanks for reporting this.  I'll add the missing origin.  But why did you think forwarding and mtu should be removed? 1. IMO since is not present in the container in the Appendix

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-rfc7277bis-00

00:01:02:03:04:05 + true false 1280 /martin Vladimir Vassilev <vladi...@transpacket.com> wrote: Hello, The previous post was intended for the rfc7223bis Last Call (wrong subject line).

Re: [netmod] [Netconf] Alternative YANG library structure for 7895bis

On 12/13/2017 08:40 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: Vladimir Vassilev <vladi...@transpacket.com> wrote: On 12/12/2017 08:20 PM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: Hi, Vladimir Vassilev <vladi...@transpacket.com> wrote: On 12/08/2017 04:06 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: On Fri, Dec 08, 2

Re: [netmod] [Netconf] Alternative YANG library structure for 7895bis

On 12/13/2017 08:19 AM, Vladimir Vassilev wrote: On 12/12/2017 08:20 PM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: Hi, Vladimir Vassilev <vladi...@transpacket.com> wrote: On 12/08/2017 04:06 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: On Fri, Dec 08, 2017 at 04:03:06PM +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote: Vl

Re: [netmod] [Netconf] Alternative YANG library structure for 7895bis

On 12/12/2017 08:20 PM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: Hi, Vladimir Vassilev <vladi...@transpacket.com> wrote: On 12/08/2017 04:06 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: On Fri, Dec 08, 2017 at 04:03:06PM +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote: Vladimir Vassilev <vladi...@transpacket.com> wrote: O

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-rfc7277bis-00

Vladimir On 12/11/2017 05:35 PM, Vladimir Vassilev wrote: Hello, I've reviewed this document and believe it is ready for publication. The focus of my review this time was on validating the module and the example modules and example data through running code. I implemented NMDA for the open

Re: [netmod] [Netconf] Alternative YANG library structure for 7895bis

gs defined in that module and that is a problem I try to avoid. Vladimir /js On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 04:53:30PM +0100, Vladimir Vassilev wrote: On 12/11/2017 12:16 PM, Robert Wilton wrote: Hi Vladimir, On 09/12/2017 11:49, Vladimir Vassilev wrote: On 12/08/2017 07:01 PM, Andy Bierman w

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-rfc7277bis-00

Hello, I've reviewed this document and believe it is ready for publication. The focus of my review this time was on validating the module and the example modules and example data through running code. I implemented NMDA for the open source tools we use and added a testcase that reproduces the

Re: [netmod] [Netconf] Alternative YANG library structure for 7895bis

On 12/11/2017 12:16 PM, Robert Wilton wrote: Hi Vladimir, On 09/12/2017 11:49, Vladimir Vassilev wrote: On 12/08/2017 07:01 PM, Andy Bierman wrote: Hi, A library per datastore sounds too complicated. I am not proposing that. I'm slightly lost, because I thought that was exactly what you

Re: [netmod] [Netconf] Alternative YANG library structure for 7895bis

i, Dec 08, 2017 at 04:19:28PM +0100, Vladimir Vassilev wrote: > > > > Yes. The default value for yang-library-datastore leaf is ds:operational > > (the only possible one for the ds:operational datastore). This is backward > > compatible. If one n

Re: [netmod] [Netconf] Alternative YANG library structure for 7895bis

to read some arguments. Vladimir Thanks, Rob On 16/11/2017 01:21, Vladimir Vassilev wrote: Hello, I have a proposal based on that provides an elegant solution to consider as a 3rd option.  It is based on keeping exactly the same model as in RFC 7895 and using RPC to retrieve datastore

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-rfc7223bis-00

On 12/05/2017 10:06 PM, Eric Voit (evoit) wrote: Hi Martin, Several comments on the YANG model within rfc7223bis. list interface { key "name"; description "The list of interfaces on the device. The status of an interface is available in this list in the

Re: [netmod] [Netconf] Alternative YANG library structure for 7895bis

Hello, I have a proposal based on that provides an elegant solution to consider as a 3rd option.  It is based on keeping exactly the same model as in RFC 7895 and using RPC to retrieve datastore specific yang-library instance data in a similar way one would use to retrieve the datastore

Re: [netmod] [Netconf] Alternative YANG library structure for 7895bis

On 11/15/2017 11:42 AM, Robert Wilton wrote: On 15/11/2017 10:41, Vladimir Vassilev wrote: On 11/15/2017 01:06 AM, Robert Wilton wrote: On 14/11/2017 23:41, Vladimir Vassilev wrote: On 11/13/2017 04:27 PM, Robert Wilton wrote: Hi Vladimir, On 12/11/2017 10:39, Vladimir Vassilev

Re: [netmod] [Netconf] Alternative YANG library structure for 7895bis

On 11/15/2017 01:06 AM, Robert Wilton wrote: On 14/11/2017 23:41, Vladimir Vassilev wrote: On 11/13/2017 04:27 PM, Robert Wilton wrote: Hi Vladimir, On 12/11/2017 10:39, Vladimir Vassilev wrote: On 11/11/2017 08:07 PM, Andy Bierman wrote: On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 3:06 AM, Robert

[netmod] validation of draft-ietf-netconf-nmda-netconf-01

Hello, There is a validation error reported for ietf-netconf-datasto...@2017-08-24.yang: Error: XPath expression 'derived-from-or-self(../datastore, "or:operational")' with invalid identity param 'or:operational' ietf-netconf-datasto...@2017-08-24.yang:140.63: error(348): invalid XPath

Re: [netmod] review of draft-acee-netmod-rfc8022bis-05

On 11/03/2017 05:49 PM, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote: Hi Vladimir, Thanks for comments - see inline. On 10/29/17, 8:43 PM, "netmod on behalf of Vladimir Vassilev" <netmod-boun...@ietf.org on behalf of vladi...@transpacket.com> wrote: Hello, I have reviewed draft-acee-netmod-r

Re: [netmod] YANG model for netowrk configuration of a device's management interface

On 11/01/2017 10:03 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: Hi, Jan Kundrát wrote: Hi, I'm working on adding NETCONF support for configuring network on a few management interfaces of our product, a random network appliance. I would prefer not to reinvent this particular wheel, so

[netmod] review of draft-acee-netmod-rfc8022bis-05

-interfa...@2017-08-17.yang module in draft-ietf-netmod-rfc7277bis-00 and ietf...@2017-08-21.yang module in draft-ietf-netmod-rfc7277bis-00. Vladimir Review of draft-acee-netmod-rfc8022bis-05. Vladimir Vassilev 2017-10-30 'Abstract': 'Introduction 1': - Both Abstract and Sec 1. contain duplicated

Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 (5157)

On 10/24/2017 07:06 PM, Andy Bierman wrote: On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 5:27 AM, Vladimir Vassilev <vladi...@transpacket.com <mailto:vladi...@transpacket.com>> wrote: On 10/24/2017 03:42 AM, Andy Bierman wrote: On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 4:57 AM, Vladimir Vassilev

Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 (5157)

On 10/24/2017 03:42 AM, Andy Bierman wrote: On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 4:57 AM, Vladimir Vassilev <vladi...@transpacket.com <mailto:vladi...@transpacket.com>> wrote: On 10/23/2017 01:35 PM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: Vladimir Vassilev <vladi...@transpacket.com

Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 (5157)

Hello, I would like to use the occasion of this Errata report to point out some additional issues with the instance-identifier type definition. IMO the instance-identifier built-in type has 2 additional problems that can be addressed with alternative and significantly more radical errata or

Re: [netmod] Pattern statements [was Re: Query about augmenting module from submodule in YANG 1.0]

On 08/21/2017 05:14 PM, Robert Wilton wrote: Hi Acee, That makes sense. The other thing that I think that we have got wrong is modelling regex pattern statements. I think that it would be much better if these were written to be less exhaustive and much simpler. E.g. the "route

Re: [netmod] Query about augmenting module from submodule in YANG 1.0

Hello, IMO "submodule"s are a striking example of redundant complexity in an otherwise very close to perfection YANG (regardless if it is YANG 1.0 or 1.1). Modules and submodules have been around for a while however the ratio of the currently published modules compared with the submodules

Re: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-intf-ext-yang-05.txt

Hello, Our validation tools report a problem that was also reported for the 04 version and still not fixed: This is our fix: diff draft-modules/ietf-flexible-encapsulat...@2017-07-03.yang ietf-flexible-encapsulat...@2017-07-03.yang 145,146c145,146 <

Re: [netmod] draft-vallin-netmod-alarm-module status and plans

Hi Kent, I followed the CCAMP thread concluding with https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ccamp/current/msg18142.html and IMO there is consensus that the draft should be move back to netmod. Vladimir On 06/22/2017 03:02 PM, Kent Watsen wrote: Hi William, Please be aware that this draft

Re: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-sub-intf-vlan-model-01.txt

On 06/15/2017 06:18 PM, Robert Wilton wrote: Hi Vladimir, Thanks for raising this. On 15/06/2017 12:59, Vladimir Vassilev wrote: Hello, There is a problem with a mutually exclusive 'when' statements for the /interfaces/inteface/encapsulation container in ietf-interfaces-com...@2017-03-13

Re: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-sub-intf-vlan-model-01.txt

Hello, There is a problem with a mutually exclusive 'when' statements for the /interfaces/inteface/encapsulation container in ietf-interfaces-com...@2017-03-13.yang (draft-ietf-netmod-intf-ext-yang-04) and ietf-if-l3-v...@2017-03-13.yang models causing error with our validation tools. As

Re: [netmod] Question on intefaces-state model

: 14 June 2017 11:40 To: Robert Wilton <rwil...@cisco.com> Cc: Vladimir Vassilev <vladi...@transpacket.com>; Andy Bierman <a...@yumaworks.com>; Bogaert, Bart (Nokia - BE/Antwerp) <bart.boga...@nokia.com>; netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] Question on intefaces-state mod

Re: [netmod] Question on intefaces-state model

On 06/12/2017 08:31 PM, Andy Bierman wrote: On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 10:21 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder > wrote: On Fri, Jun 09, 2017 at 10:55:20AM +, Bogaert, Bart (Nokia - BE/Antwerp) wrote: >

Re: [netmod] YANG doctor review of draft-ietf-netmod-intf-ext-yang-04

Hello, On 04/06/2017 07:43 PM, Andy Bierman wrote: 3) identity ethSubInterface This identity is used in the encapsulation container when-stmt. It is not clear if this is intended as a base identity (like identity sub-interface) An example for the encapsulation container would help clarify

Re: [netmod] Modelling different "levels" of data in YANG

Hi, Here is a summary of the proposed solutions so far: * The solution with introduction of YANG statement "diagnostics true;", additional datastore and NETCONF protocol change. IMO that sounds heavy but valid solution. * The solution with RPC returning the data as output. IMO has the

Re: [netmod] Modelling different "levels" of data in YANG

On 12/06/2016 10:03 PM, Alex Campbell wrote: IMO using an action or rpc is an okay solution for now, certainly better than than not including the data at all. If I have to chose between RPC with 'output' containing the state data for selected interface and mapping the data to a

Re: [netmod] Modelling different "levels" of data in YANG

On 12/06/2016 10:40 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: I fear that a dumb client sending a without a proper filter to select the data that is relevant for the client will not necessarily get smarter by defining additional operations. Sometimes access control can help to control dumb clients

Re: [netmod] Modelling different "levels" of data in YANG

On 12/05/2016 07:10 PM, Robert Wilton wrote: Hi, We are currently working on modelling 802.3 Ethernet YANG within the 802.3 YANG study group. One interesting issue that has come up is the scope of the operational state data that could be modeled: At the top level, an operator may just

Re: [netmod] How to prevent a client from modifying the type of an interface?

On 11/29/2016 05:18 PM, Jan Lindblad wrote: Bart, Jürgen et al are of course right in what they say, but if you really want to use YANG to enable a manager to know a priori what values are possible for a particular leaf somewhere, that's easy too -- if you see the addition of a new

Re: [netmod] New Version Notification for draft-vallin-netmod-alarm-module-00.txt

Hi, I also reviewed the ietf-alarms model. We are interested and intend to implement it replacing our proprietary model. The model is flexible and covers all alarms scenarios we support. IMO the operator and shelving functionality can potentially be moved to additional module augmenting a

Re: [netmod] 'when' statement in edit-config payload parsing

dd. Vladimir Andy On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 4:43 AM, Vladimir Vassilev <vladi...@transpacket.com <mailto:vladi...@transpacket.com>> wrote: On 09/13/2016 01:26 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 01:19:02PM +0200, Vladimir Vassilev wrote:

Re: [netmod] 'when' statement in edit-config payload parsing

On 09/13/2016 10:25 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 09:34:33AM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: On 13 Sep 2016, at 09:01, Yves Beauville wrote: Both RFC 6020 and RFC 7950 are providing the same requirement in section 'Payload Parsing': o If

[netmod] Circular dependency in 'when'

Hi, Is there any practical value of 'when' statements with circular dependency to the value of the parent (in case it is a leaf) or any children of the parent? container circular-dependency-when { leaf a { when "(. + ../b) = 100"; type uint16 { range

Re: [netmod] How to constrain a leaf to a read-only list of supported values?

are all your concerns about iana-if-type. Balazs On 2016-08-31 14:16, Vladimir Vassilev wrote: On 08/31/2016 12:38 PM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: On 31 Aug 2016, at 11:10, Vladimir Vassilev <vladi...@transpacket.com> wrote: If you design your models using identityref and define the identities

Re: [netmod] How to constrain a leaf to a read-only list of supported values?

On 08/31/2016 01:10 PM, Balazs Lengyel wrote: Hello, The problem is not just about identities. It can be a value range. If your example was about value range then a deviation would be a solution. Then we have the same case for modularization. YANG files defining deviations loaded when the

Re: [netmod] How to constrain a leaf to a read-only list of supported values?

If you design your models using identityref and define the identities in separate modules e.g. compression-zip.yang, compression-gzip.yang, etc. you can just chose not to load the particular YANG models containing the identities not supported when your device starts. If you absolutely can not

Re: [netmod] [Netconf] What should a server response be? - depending on NP-containers

On 08/23/2016 11:09 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: Vladimir Vassilev <vladi...@transpacket.com> wrote: On 08/23/2016 10:15 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: They are evaluated. See Section 7.5.3: When a datastore is validated, all "must" constraints are conceptually evaluat

Re: [netmod] [Netconf] What should a server response be? - depending on NP-containers

On 08/23/2016 10:15 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: They are evaluated. See Section 7.5.3: When a datastore is validated, all "must" constraints are conceptually evaluated once for each node in the accessible tree (see Section 6.4.1). /martin Then we have the case I objected to and

Re: [netmod] [Netconf] What should a server response be? - depending on NP-containers

On 08/23/2016 12:08 AM, Alex Campbell wrote: The intention in this case is obviously to evaluate the 'must' statement if the container contains any values; what would break if we said that A non-presence container exists in the data tree if and only if it has any children which exist in

Re: [netmod] [Netconf] What should a server response be? - depending on NP-containers

On 08/22/2016 06:45 PM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: I disagree. If the model needs to have some semantic validation rules, the designer is going to put them in a place such that they are evaluated when the need to be evaluated. So designers augmenting /interfaces/interface with non-presence

Re: [netmod] [Netconf] What should a server response be? - depending on NP-containers

On 08/22/2016 06:37 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 06:15:50PM +0200, Vladimir Vassilev wrote: On 08/22/2016 06:10 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 05:59:37PM +0200, Vladimir Vassilev wrote: Which of the 3 issues pointed in the conclusion you

Re: [netmod] [Netconf] What should a server response be? - depending on NP-containers

On 08/22/2016 06:10 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 05:59:37PM +0200, Vladimir Vassilev wrote: Which of the 3 issues pointed in the conclusion you don't agree with and why {1. limited validation expression flexibility, 2. higher validation workload, 3. broken NACM

Re: [netmod] [Netconf] What should a server response be? - depending on NP-containers

On 08/22/2016 03:36 PM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: This example is based on the bug I propose to be fixed. If you looked at the patch I propose in https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netconf/current/msg11637.html sec. 7.1.6 of RFC 6020 is modified: --- OLD: 7.6.1. The leaf's default value

Re: [netmod] [Netconf] What should a server response be? - depending on NP-containers

On 08/22/2016 01:56 PM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: Vladimir Vassilev <vladi...@transpacket.com> writes: On 08/20/2016 10:29 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: As document shepherd, I believe there is no strong agreement on the problem and there is no concrete proposal with strong con

Re: [netmod] [Netconf] What should a server response be? - depending on NP-containers

Dear Juergen Schoenwaelder, On 08/22/2016 11:25 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 07:18:42PM +0200, Vladimir Vassilev wrote: Hello, I have strong objection to the text proposed as solution to issue #41: Dear Vladimir Vassilev, please note that we YANG 1.1

Re: [netmod] [Netconf] What should a server response be? - depending on NP-containers

On 08/20/2016 10:29 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: As document shepherd, I believe there is no strong agreement on the problem and there is no concrete proposal with strong consensus for a modification of the document (which is in AUTH48). In fact, there has been no defect description and