On Tue, May 05, 2020 at 12:06:34PM +0200, Per Hedeland wrote:
> On 2020-05-05 11:55, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
> > On Tue, May 05, 2020 at 11:45:41AM +0200, Per Hedeland wrote:
> >> On 2020-05-05 11:00, Martin Björklund wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> If we were to redo YANG, I would prefer to
"Rob Wilton (rwilton)" wrote:
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: netmod On Behalf Of Martin Björklund
> > Sent: 05 May 2020 11:30
> > To: p...@hedeland.org
> > Cc: netmod@ietf.org
> > Subject: Re: [netmod] YANG action not allowed
> -Original Message-
> From: netmod On Behalf Of Martin Björklund
> Sent: 05 May 2020 11:30
> To: p...@hedeland.org
> Cc: netmod@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [netmod] YANG action not allowed at root?
>
> Per Hedeland wrote:
> > On 2020-05-05 11:5
t; To: Martin Björklund
> > Cc: netmod@ietf.org
> > Subject: Re: [netmod] YANG action not allowed at root?
> >
> > On Tue, May 05, 2020 at 11:00:11AM +0200, Martin Björklund wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > If we were to redo YANG, I wou
Per Hedeland wrote:
> On 2020-05-05 11:55, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
> > On Tue, May 05, 2020 at 11:45:41AM +0200, Per Hedeland wrote:
> >> On 2020-05-05 11:00, Martin Björklund wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> If we were to redo YANG, I would prefer to have a single statement
> >>> "operation",
On 2020-05-05 11:55, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
> On Tue, May 05, 2020 at 11:45:41AM +0200, Per Hedeland wrote:
>> On 2020-05-05 11:00, Martin Björklund wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> If we were to redo YANG, I would prefer to have a single statement
>>> "operation", either on the top-level, or tied to
;>>}
>>>}
>>>
>>> Which could be called from NETCONF like this:
>>>
>>> >> xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1..0">
>>>
>>>
>>>5
>>>
On 05/05/2020 11:00, Martin Björklund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> If we were to redo YANG, I would prefer to have a single statement
> "operation", either on the top-level, or tied to a node.
Yeah, and we could introduce 'operation' as a generalized concept and
have rpc/action be just syntactic aliases for
On Tue, May 05, 2020 at 11:00:11AM +0200, Martin Björklund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> If we were to redo YANG, I would prefer to have a single statement
> "operation", either on the top-level, or tied to a node.
>
+1
/js
--
Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: +49 421
d from NETCONF like this:
> >
> > > xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1..0">
> >
> >
> > 5
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Jason
> &g
xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1..0">
>
>
>5
>
>
>
>
>
> Jason
>
> From: Reshad Rahman (rrahman)
> Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2020 11:31 AM
> To: Sterne, Jason (Nokia - CA/Otta
., csütörtök 17:51
To: Reshad Rahman (rrahman) ; netmod@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netmod] YANG action not allowed at root?
Yes - the intent was to address the limitation that an RPC can only be at root.
Actions can be out in a tree & nicely associated with something (e.g. instead
of having a
pril 30, 2020 11:31 AM
To: Sterne, Jason (Nokia - CA/Ottawa) ; netmod@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netmod] YANG action not allowed at root?
I don’t know the history on this but the intent is to have action tied to a
data node.
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7950#section-7.15
The difference bet
, the node in the datastore is specified along with the name
of the action and the input parameters.
Regards,
Reshad.
From: netmod on behalf of "Sterne, Jason (Nokia -
CA/Ottawa)"
Date: Thursday, April 30, 2020 at 11:08 AM
To: "netmod@ietf.org"
Subject: [netmod] YANG action
Hi all,
I was a bit surprised to find this in section 7.15 of 7950 recently:
Since an action cannot be defined at the top level of a module or in
a "case" statement, it is an error if a grouping that contains an
action at the top of its node hierarchy is used at the top level of a
15 matches
Mail list logo
