Here’s an update to the agenda for the two sessions at 94:
Updates:
- syslog removed (because it’s ready for Last Call)
- diffserv removed (nothing to report)
- models moved to morning slot
- times and presenters locked in (almost)
https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/94/agenda/agenda-94-netm
Hi,
I buy Martin's argument that "when" stmt is like "choice".
The draft says exactly what will happen if the constraint
is not satisfied. Why don't we require the client to delete
the old case and create the new case all at once?
The "when" auto-deletion is no less scary then "case" auto-deleti
On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 02:42:26PM -0700, Andy Bierman wrote:
> Auto-deletion avoids forcing the client to make multiple edits,
> possibly leaving the datastore in a vulnerable state in between
> edits.
A single edit can say 'delete this, add that' and then you validate
the result. This is simple
On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder <
j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 10:35:48AM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> > Martin Bjorklund writes:
> >
> > > auto-deletion in choice/when should be described as a property of the
> > > data model fo
On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 10:35:48AM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> Martin Bjorklund writes:
>
> > auto-deletion in choice/when should be described as a property of the
> > data model for the datastore. Parts of the text from Section 8.2.2
> > should be made more generic and moved, probably to a
> On 23 Oct 2015, at 18:40, Robert Wilton wrote:
>
> Hi Randy,
>
> On 23/10/2015 17:15, Randy Presuhn wrote:
>> Hi -
>>
>>> From: Martin Bjorklund
>>> Sent: Oct 23, 2015 12:24 AM
>>> To: randy_pres...@mindspring.com
>>> Cc: netmod@ietf.org
>>> Subject: Re: [netmod] Yang 1.0/1.1 ABNF Grammar:
On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 9:15 AM, Randy Presuhn wrote:
> Hi -
>
> >From: Martin Bjorklund
> >Sent: Oct 23, 2015 12:24 AM
> >To: randy_pres...@mindspring.com
> >Cc: netmod@ietf.org
> >Subject: Re: [netmod] Yang 1.0/1.1 ABNF Grammar: the rule ...>
> >
> >Randy Presuhn wrote:
> >> Hi -
> >>
> >> >
Hi Randy,
On 23/10/2015 17:15, Randy Presuhn wrote:
Hi -
From: Martin Bjorklund
Sent: Oct 23, 2015 12:24 AM
To: randy_pres...@mindspring.com
Cc: netmod@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netmod] Yang 1.0/1.1 ABNF Grammar:
Randy Presuhn wrote:
Hi -
From: Martin Bjorklund
Sent: Oct 22, 2015 6:20 AM
Hi -
>From: Martin Bjorklund
>Sent: Oct 23, 2015 12:24 AM
>To: randy_pres...@mindspring.com
>Cc: netmod@ietf.org
>Subject: Re: [netmod] Yang 1.0/1.1 ABNF Grammar: rule ...>
>
>Randy Presuhn wrote:
>> Hi -
>>
>> >From: Martin Bjorklund
>> >Sent: Oct 22, 2015 6:20 AM
>> >To: lho...@nic.cz
>> >Cc
The NETCONF Data Modeling Language (netmod) working group in the
Operations and Management Area of the IETF has been rechartered. For
additional information please contact the Area Directors or the WG
Chairs.
NETCONF Data Modeling Language (netmod)
> On 23 Oct 2015, at 16:02, Andy Bierman wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 1:58 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> > Martin Bjorklund writes:
> >
> > > Balazs Lengyel wrote:
> > >> Hello Lada,
> > >> The issue is what is "too much protocol details" ?
> > >> I agree
On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 1:58 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> > Martin Bjorklund writes:
> >
> > > Balazs Lengyel wrote:
> > >> Hello Lada,
> > >> The issue is what is "too much protocol details" ?
> > >> I agree that there are many things that are not part of the YANG
>
Hi Balazs,
On 22/10/2015 17:01, Balazs Lengyel wrote:
Hello,
- We define the derived state but we do not define "non-derived state"
although it is referred to in the requirements. I would need a
definition even if it is just a definition by examples. Better then
nothing.
Yes, if it is used,
> On 23 Oct 2015, at 10:58, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
>
> Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>> Martin Bjorklund writes:
>>
>>> Balazs Lengyel wrote:
Hello Lada,
The issue is what is "too much protocol details" ?
I agree that there are many things that are not part of the YANG
language
Andy Bierman writes:
> Hi,
>
>
> I have to report that at least 1 customer agrees with you about
> auto-deletion.
> The comment was "how are we supposed to tell there is a bug in the client
> if we do not get back an error instead of silent deletion?"
This is not only a matter of bugs in client
Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> Martin Bjorklund writes:
>
> > Balazs Lengyel wrote:
> >> Hello Lada,
> >> The issue is what is "too much protocol details" ?
> >> I agree that there are many things that are not part of the YANG
> >> language/metamodel itself. On the other hand if a simple create leaf
Andy Bierman writes:
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 4:45 AM, Balazs Lengyel > wrote:
>
>> I would love to get rid of the autodelete feature. It really complicates
>> things.
>>
>
>
> So how would when-stmt work?
> It would be an error if a false when-stmt ever occurred?
>
>
> leaf X { type int32; }
Martin Bjorklund writes:
> Balazs Lengyel wrote:
>> Hello Lada,
>> The issue is what is "too much protocol details" ?
>> I agree that there are many things that are not part of the YANG
>> language/metamodel itself. On the other hand if a simple create leaf
>> operation on different interfaces c
Randy Presuhn wrote:
> Hi -
>
> >From: Martin Bjorklund
> >Sent: Oct 22, 2015 6:20 AM
> >To: lho...@nic.cz
> >Cc: netmod@ietf.org
> >Subject: Re: [netmod] Yang 1.0/1.1 ABNF Grammar: >rule ...>
> ...
> >> > 2. Similarly for import-stmt. Should this have a comment indicating
> >> > that prefix-
19 matches
Mail list logo
