Lada,
I do not think this belongs into the YANG specification. NC has been
designed to support arbitrary XML so any NC compliant implementation
will not screw up on XML attributes. The JSON encoding could say that
names with @ may be used for special purposes and must be supported
and that impleme
Hi,
my idea was that YANG spec contain a general statement that data may be
complemented with annotations, i.e. information that's not represented in the
data model as regular YANG data nodes, and that every encoding has to specify
how these annotations can be recognized in the payload. Parsers
Hi -
> From: "Sterne, Jason (Jason)"
> Sent: Nov 3, 2015 12:02 AM
> To: "netmod@ietf.org"
> Subject: [netmod] netmod-opstate-reqs: Are 2.A. and 4.C. the same thing ?
> (derived + non-derived)
...
> But isn’t 4.C. also a repeat of 2.A. ?
>
> 2.A.: The ability to retrieve the applied configuration
If you are planning to participate in the NETMOD session here at IETF 94 today
— either locally in Yokohama or as a remote participant — we want to make sure
that you are aware that the IETF is providing a remote participants with a
fairly new way to ask questions or make comments. In addition t
Hi,
The YANG packages draft that I mentioned today is
http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-bierman-netmod-yang-package-00.txt
I think it might be suitable for Ian's draft on CPE modeling.
/martin
___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org
Hi Lou,
I didn't understand the point in your presentation where you said that
groupings are not augmentable. What you can do is the following:
module A {
grouping foo { ... }
}
module B {
import A { prefix A; }
grouping foo {
uses A:foo;
... // additional nodes
}
}
While it do
Jason,
As always, thanks for your feedback!
I am consolidating your two sets of comments into one reply with my responses
as [clw]:
[js] I’m not sure it is typical to have configuration in a device that
basically instructs the device to enable logging to the terminal for “user x”
whenever tha
If you are planning to participate in the NETMOD session here at IETF 94 today
— either locally in Yokohama or as a remote participant — we want to make sure
that you are aware that the IETF is providing a remote participants with a
fairly new way to ask questions or make comments. In addition t
Yes, time is tight for the morning session, the more we can dispatch beforehand
the better.
Not just Jabber scribe, but also minute-takers - please, if you’re willing to
take minutes for the morning session, let us know now.
Lastly, I forgot to bring my thunderbolt-to-hdmi/dvi cable thingy. If
Dear All
Request for Jabber Scribes
We would be very grateful if there are a couple of folks who would be willing
to volunteer as a scribe for either of the two sessions we have at this IETF.
Since I’m unable to attend this IETF, and the tz is against me for email later,
please ping both Kent
On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 09:40:00PM -0800, Randy Presuhn wrote:
> Hi -
>
> >From: Juergen Schoenwaelder
> >Sent: Oct 29, 2015 1:06 AM
> >To: netmod@ietf.org
> >Subject: [netmod] leaf-list uniqueness requirement for non-config nodes
> >
> >Hi,
> >
> >RFC 6020 say:
> >
> > The values in a leaf-lis
Hi all,
In reading through the netmod-opstate-reqs draft I see it is already noted that
5 seems to be a repeat of 4.a.
But isn't 4.C. also a repeat of 2.A. ?
2.A.: The ability to retrieve the applied configuration and derived state
nodes in a single protocol operation.
4.C.: Be able to retri
12 matches
Mail list logo
