like Balazs' example but in fact it is different - if
there is no foo, the must expression doesn't apply.
Lada
Kent
Andy
___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
are
rare.
Sorry for the long explanation, but hopefully the explanation is clear.
Thanks for your inputs.
Norm
___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID
On 09 Jun 2015, at 22:23, Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com wrote:
Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote:
Hi,
RFC 6020bis says in Sec. 7.10: The anydata statement is used to
represent an unknown set of nodes that can be modelled with YANG. I'd
like to clarify what this means with respect
On 17 Jun 2015, at 13:51, Juergen Schoenwaelder
j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de wrote:
On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 01:41:56PM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
Well, but it is exactly what Kent objected against. It is the requirement to
support “old clients” that causes the trouble here
___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C
___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C
___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
these examples.
Thanks, Lada
Thanks,
Kent
___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C
___
netmod mailing list
On 01 Jul 2015, at 09:21, Juergen Schoenwaelder
j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de wrote:
On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 08:54:07AM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
Juergen Schoenwaelder j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de writes:
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 04:07:10PM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote
On 01 Jul 2015, at 14:33, Juergen Schoenwaelder
j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de wrote:
On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 02:03:15PM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
On 01 Jul 2015, at 09:21, Juergen Schoenwaelder
j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de wrote:
On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 08:54:07AM
here but I fear they could still make for unnecessary
discussions.
Martin already pointed out in his review that it may be wiser to replace
the inactive annotation with something less controversial.
ok.
Regards, Benoit
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C
://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C
___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
implemented the data model in I-D XYZ
I am implementing the data model in I-D XYZ
I am considering to implement the data model in I-D XYZ
This is the first Last Call for this document.
Kent, as NETMOD co-chair
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C
___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
(as a contributor)
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C
___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com writes:
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
example.
Otherwise, it's difficult to visualize how these metadata should be
used.
Sure, there will be at least one. I just have to select an appropriate
one to demonstrate the intended use without stirring up some ghosts.
Lada
Regards, Benoit (as a contributor)
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC
On 02 Jul 2015, at 22:08, Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 11:33 PM, Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote:
Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com writes:
I agree with Juergen that the implementation of YANG constraints
on a datastore is not XML-specific
___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C
___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
would also support
leaf a in module A of type foo from foo@2001-01-01
leaf b in module A of type foo from foo@2002-02-02
Of course, how much a specific implementation is affected will vary,
but I don't think the concepts are *that* different.
/martin
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
, how much a specific implementation is affected will vary,
but I don't think the concepts are *that* different.
/martin
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C
___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo
On 21 May 2015, at 16:50, Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com wrote:
Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote:
On 21 May 2015, at 16:42, Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com wrote:
Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote:
RFC 6020 also states that must and when expessions are XPath 1.0, and
we
a
new data node type though an extension.
Lada
/js
Andy
--
Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
Fax: +49 421 200 3103 http://www.jacobs-university.de/
--
Ladislav
-name pattern.
Lada
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C
___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
, but with no formal representation
of their common heritage.
Randy
___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C
On 17 Aug 2015, at 18:50, Randy Presuhn randy_pres...@mindspring.com wrote:
Hi -
From: Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz
Sent: Aug 17, 2015 6:12 AM
To: netmod@ietf.org
Subject: [netmod] domain-name
Hi,
it seems the typedef domain-name in the ietf-inet-types (RFC 6991)
is too
data model complexity to devices which do not have virtual servers
(most of them).
/martin
Andy
___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C
; // allow this specific top-level node
/martin
.
___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C
Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz writes:
Hi,
2. The rogue vendor can use a must statement to achieve the same
effect (or perhaps just state it in a description?). What’s important
is whether the server that advertises such an extension rejects a
configuration where the new parameter is missing
On 24 Aug 2015, at 18:42, Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 9:35 AM, Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote:
Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz writes:
Hi,
2. The rogue vendor can use a must statement to achieve the same
effect (or perhaps just state
On 24 Aug 2015, at 21:01, Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com wrote:
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
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 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
On 20 Aug 2015, at 15:26, Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com wrote:
Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote:
Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com writes:
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 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 1.1 issue Y26 [1] is marked as DONE, I think
Randy Presuhn randy_pres...@mindspring.com writes:
Hi -
From: Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz
Sent: Aug 16, 2015 12:52 AM
To: Randy Presuhn randy_pres...@mindspring.com, netmod@ietf.org
netmod@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netmod] Constraint on mandatory on nodes as part of
augmentation in RFC6020bis
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 6020 so I’d say it shouldn’t be repeated
On 29 Jul 2015, at 17:02, Juergen Schoenwaelder
j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de wrote:
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 04:55:03PM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
On 29 Jul 2015, at 16:44, Juergen Schoenwaelder
j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de wrote:
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 04:38:41PM
On 30 Jul 2015, at 13:31, Jernej Tuljak jern...@mg-soft.si wrote:
Ladislav Lhotka je 30.7.2015 ob 11:30 napisal:
On 30 Jul 2015, at 01:12, 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
On 30 Jul 2015, at 13:41, Jernej Tuljak jern...@mg-soft.si wrote:
Ladislav Lhotka je 30.7.2015 ob 13:35 napisal:
On 30 Jul 2015, at 13:31, Jernej Tuljak jern...@mg-soft.si wrote:
Ladislav Lhotka je 30.7.2015 ob 11:30 napisal:
On 30 Jul 2015, at 01:12, Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com
On 30 Jul 2015, at 13:38, Juergen Schoenwaelder
j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de wrote:
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 01:31:01PM +0200, Jernej Tuljak wrote:
Ladislav Lhotka je 30.7.2015 ob 11:30 napisal:
On 30 Jul 2015, at 01:12, Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 29
wrote:
Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 2:58 AM, Martin Bjorklund m...@tail-f.com
wrote:
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
that at
least some of my IETF work ever gets finished.
Lada
/js
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 01:06:54PM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
On 26 Jul 2015, at 12:55, Juergen Schoenwaelder
j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de wrote:
Any are concrete actionable proposals?
Start rewriting
Bremen gGmbH
Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
Fax: +49 421 200 3103 http://www.jacobs-university.de/
___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
--
Ladislav
On 03 Aug 2015, at 18:01, Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 7:48 AM, Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote:
On 03 Aug 2015, at 16:41, Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 2:25 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder
j.schoenwael
.
I assume this is true for the data tree as well. But in the first
variant above we could have (if top is a non-RPC container)
top
a: 1
b: 3
a: 2
while this interleaving isn't possible with the second variant.
Lada
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID
-system, and for example
by default provide read-access to
/system/radius/server/udp/shared-secret?
/martin
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C
___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman
___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C
___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
Juergen Schoenwaelder j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de writes:
On Thu, Aug 06, 2015 at 02:50:04PM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
If there is no ephemeral data, then config data is what counts. However, if
some config parameters may be overriden by ephemeral values, then a separate
On 15 Aug 2015, at 01:32, heasley h...@shrubbery.net wrote:
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 12:43 PM, Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote:
On 13 Aug 2015, at 21:31, Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote:
Hi,
IMO this is issue is closed.
I see no reason to re-open it.
YANG does not allow
)
timothy.ca...@alcatel-lucent.com wrote:
Lada,
Yes sorry - I just saw that thread after I submitted mine.
BR,
Tim
-Original Message-
From: Ladislav Lhotka [mailto:lho...@nic.cz]
Sent: Saturday, August 15, 2015 10:25 AM
To: Carey, Timothy (Timothy)
Cc: netmod@ietf.org
Subject
=netmodgbt=1index=ES2ogm1wabzZVIIBlrRor0fn3rk
Lada
Thanks,
Tim
___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C
.
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C
___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
/
___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C
Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com writes:
On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 11:58 AM, Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote:
On 03 Aug 2015, at 18:01, Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 7:48 AM, Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote:
On 03 Aug 2015, at 16:41, Andy
On 06 Aug 2015, at 17:31, Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 5:50 AM, Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote:
On 06 Aug 2015, at 13:03, Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 12:43 AM, Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote:
Andy
, Jul 26, 2015 at 12:46:22PM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
On 26 Jul 2015, at 02:26, Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote:
Hi,
The WG should decide what it means for YANG to not
be NETCONF-specific. Why does YANG define extensions
to NETCONF operations (like insert)? IMO the normative
with
[default-case-stmt], and then adding
default-case-stmt = default-keyword sep node-identifier stmtend
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C
___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
to the syslogtypes:severity
enumeration.
Lada
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C
___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
On 7/14/15, 9:03 AM, Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote:
On 14 Jul 2015, at 17:25, Clyde Wildes (cwildes) cwil...@cisco.com wrote:
Lada,
Thanks for your review.
All was not added to the syslogtypes:severity because that would alter the
definition of severity as specified by RFC
is only true if lower-port exists and is
less than this element.;
error-message Lower-port is required, and must be less than
upper-port;
}
}
}
/jan
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C
___
netmod mailing list
On 20 Jul 2015, at 14:45, Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote:
Hi,
after listening to the presentation of
draft-rtgyangdt-rtgwg-device-model-00 at RTGWG session, I am wondering
whether the solution chosen for Y34 is really useful.
The draft states they want to reuse ietf-interfaces
, and
more complex router implementations can graft it as a subtree under
routing-instance, networking-instance or whatever.
Lada
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C
___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman
On 20 Jul 2015, at 17:00, Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote:
On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 6:08 AM, Ladislav Lhotka lho...@nic.cz wrote:
On 20 Jul 2015, at 14:55, Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote:
Hi,
Can you explain why we need 2 broken anyxmls?
(The original
”,
e.g. in configlets. The gap in “anydata” definition for similar use cases is
that it cannot specify a schema for its contents.
Lada
/js
On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 07:42:49PM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
On 20 Jul 2015, at 19:29, Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote:
On Mon, Jul 20
On 21 Jul 2015, at 09:44, Juergen Schoenwaelder
j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de wrote:
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 09:16:46AM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
On 20 Jul 2015, at 23:00, Juergen Schoenwaelder
j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de wrote:
Lada,
Y34 is closed and I have
on.
One option would be to create two virtual interfaces - one for IPv4 VPN and
another for IPv6 VPN, and define routing-instance and addresses separately for
each.
Lada
>
> r.
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C
___
n
Why would this scenario be treated differently then if the auto-delete
> happens
> on a node provided in the payload?
I don't advocate auto-deleting anything in payload either.
Lada
>
>
>
> regards Balazs
>>
>
> Andy
>
>
>>
>> On 2015-10-18 16:43, Ladis
t
>> works (mostly) the same way on all interfaces. The more differences we have
>> the less usable the product, the more difficult to implement.
>> regards Balazs
>>
>> On 2015-10-21 15:07, Andy Bierman wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 21, 20
> On 23 Oct 2015, at 10:58, Martin Bjorklund <m...@tail-f.com> wrote:
>
> Ladislav Lhotka <lho...@nic.cz> wrote:
>> Martin Bjorklund <m...@tail-f.com> writes:
>>
>>> Balazs Lengyel <balazs.leng...@ericsson.com> wrote:
>>>>
> On 23 Oct 2015, at 16:02, Andy Bierman <a...@yumaworks.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 1:58 AM, Martin Bjorklund <m...@tail-f.com> wrote:
> Ladislav Lhotka <lho...@nic.cz> wrote:
> > Martin Bjorklund <m...@tail-f.com> writes:
>
model driven OAM is that we have one model that works
> (mostly) the same way on all interfaces. The more differences we have the
> less usable the product, the more difficult to implement.
> regards Balazs
>
> On 2015-10-21 15:07, Andy Bierman wrote:
>>
>>
>> O
an have
>> ripple effects. A validate operation that changes was is being
>> validated is scary. Its like pyang modifying foo.yang while parsing it
>> in an attempt to finish without parsing errors...
>>
>> /js
>>
>> --
>> Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs Uni
> On 27 Oct 2015, at 16:12, Robert Wilton <rwil...@cisco.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Lada,
>
> Thanks for the review and comments, please see inline ...
>
> On 27/10/2015 13:25, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>> Hi Rob,
>>
>> I think both modules are useful
s University Bremen gGmbH
> Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
> Fax: +49 421 200 3103 <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>
>
> ___
> netmod mailing list
> netm
t 03:07:41PM +0200, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> > > Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de> wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 10:35:48AM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> > > > > Martin Bjorklund <m...@tail-f.com> wr
;;; feed, but excluding the other C0 control characters, the surrogate
>>>>;; blocks, and the noncharacters.
>>>>yang-char = %x9 / %xA / %xD / %x20-D7FF /
>>> I think this would be ok.
>>>
>>>> 3. There are lots of comments wher
nk that defining a general datastore API as a part of YANG spec is
not useful. Protocols that potentially might use YANG (gRPC, Cap'n
Proto) won't be changed, so should we tell them not to use YANG?
IMO YANG spec should tell what's valid and what isn't, and stop there.
Lada
>
>
> /mart
> On 21 Oct 2015, at 15:07, Andy Bierman <a...@yumaworks.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 5:46 AM, Ladislav Lhotka <lho...@nic.cz> wrote:
>
> > On 21 Oct 2015, at 14:33, Andy Bierman <a...@yumaworks.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
gt;> >
>> > I am not in favor of anything XML or JSON specific in YANG.
>> > In reality, nobody uses anyxml as a configuration data node,
>> > so an improper roundtrip translation from JSON to XML
>> > is not going to happen.
>> >
>> > Enco
Robert Varga <n...@hq.sk> writes:
> On 11/05/2015 09:56 AM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>>> Given the resolution of Y34 in YANG 1.1, Martin's proposal to encode
>>> >anyxml as a string that has XML inside makes sense.
>> The possibility of sending arbitrary (n
> On 11 Nov 2015, at 13:26, Juergen Schoenwaelder
> <j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 11:54:58AM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>>
>>> On 11 Nov 2015, at 09:07, Juergen Schoenwaelder
>>> <j.schoenwael...@jaco
> On 11 Nov 2015, at 14:44, Juergen Schoenwaelder
> <j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 02:24:15PM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I wrote 'effectively deprecated' and here is the text in 6020bis
gt; The nice thing about this approach is that it models the port in a way
>> that is close to how it actually _is_. Each port needs only a single
>> interface that's directly associated with the handshake mechanism and
>> the supported physical layer standards.
>>
>> A possible disadvantage of this approach is that it is a bit less well
>> aligned with RFC 7223, e.g there is only one interface-level
>> enable/disable that has to be "shared" by color-selector, green and red.
>>
>>
>> ___
>> netmod mailing list
>> netmod@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>
> ___
> netmod mailing list
> netmod@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C
___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
Randy Presuhn <randy_pres...@mindspring.com> writes:
> Hi -
>
>>From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de>
>>Sent: Nov 11, 2015 5:44 AM
>>To: Ladislav Lhotka <lho...@nic.cz>
>>Cc: netmod@ietf.org
>>Subject: Re:
> On 13 Nov 2015, at 19:19, Andy Bierman <a...@yumaworks.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 11:51 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder
> <j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 08:10:51AM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> &
> On 16 Nov 2015, at 14:40, Juergen Schoenwaelder
> <j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 01:09:20PM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>>
>>> On 16 Nov 2015, at 12:55, Juergen Schoenwaelder
>>> <j.schoenwael...@jaco
gt;
>>
>> /js
>>
>> Andy
>>
>>
>> --
>> Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
>> Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
>> Fax: +49 421 200 3103 <http://www.j
ged
by mistake).
Lada
>
>
>
>
>
> /martin
>>
>>
>
> Andy
>
>
>> ___
>> netmod mailing list
>> netmod@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>>
> ___
> netmod mailing list
> netmod@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C
___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
g simple.
In the example in Y13, the identityref could be
type identityref {
base share-alike;
base non-commercial;
}
and then the only permitted value would be CC-BY-NC-SA.
...
>
>> Sec. 10.3.1. deref()
>>
>> - why is this XPath function needed?
>>No use-cases are explained.
>>The example given shows that deref(.) saves some extra typing
>>from the previous line. Not very interesting new feature.
>
> If the node is an instance-identifier, it is not possible to check the
> target node w/o deref().
Right, and evaluate() function in EXSLT does the same thing:
http://exslt.org/dyn/functions/evaluate/index.html
Maybe we could reuse its definition.
...
Lada
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C
___
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
> On 02 Nov 2015, at 09:40, Andy Bierman <a...@yumaworks.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sun, Nov 1, 2015 at 4:20 PM, Ladislav Lhotka <lho...@nic.cz> wrote:
>
> > On 02 Nov 2015, at 02:16, Andy Bierman <a...@yumaworks.com> wrote:
> >
> >
Lada
>
> (BTW, customers have asked for (B), so it may be a feature and a bugfix)
>
>
> Andy
>
>
>
> _______
> netmod mailing list
> netmod@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP
> On 30 Oct 2015, at 20:37, Martin Bjorklund <m...@tail-f.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Ladislav Lhotka <lho...@nic.cz> wrote:
>> Moreover - and this might actually be a flaw in 6020bis - it is
>> not allowed to update the "when" statement
Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
>> Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
>> Fax: +49 421 200 3103 <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>
>>
>> ___
>> netmod maili
ode are required to be modellable
in YANG.
BTW, it seems that yang-patch needs to be able to transfer anyxml instances, so
is it really possible to exclude anyxml from anydata content?
Lada
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C
_
Andy Bierman <a...@yumaworks.com> writes:
> On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 9:53 AM, Randy Presuhn <randy_pres...@mindspring.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi -
>>
>> >From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de>
>> >Sent: Nov 3, 20
ess
something else is available. Sending XML documents as strings is still possible
although IMO next to useless.
Lada
>
> /js
>
> On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 02:54:56PM +0900, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> at the NETMOD session Martin proposed that JSON enc
. Parsers of YANG data
(in whatever encoding) then MUST be prepared to receive such annotations (and
perhaps ignore them).
I don't think such a statement is encoding-specific.
Lada
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C
___
netmod mailing
Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de> writes:
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 09:52:00AM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> The "schema" part addresses syntactic changes in protocol messages,
>> which are inevitable, and the s
Xiang Li <xian...@seguesoft.com> writes:
> On 10/18/2015 8:31 AM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>> Xiang Li <xian...@seguesoft.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 10/16/2015 6:05 AM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>>>>> On 16 Oct 2015, at 12:27, Balazs Lengyel <balaz
+--rw description? string
"Acee Lindem (acee)" <a...@cisco.com> writes:
> On 10/13/15, 12:30 PM, "Ladislav Lhotka" <lho...@nic.cz> wrote:
>
>>
>>> On 13 Oct 2015, at 17:20, Acee Lindem (acee) <a...@cisco.com> wrote:
>>&g
> On 14 Oct 2015, at 19:28, Martin Bjorklund <m...@tail-f.com> wrote:
>
> Ladislav Lhotka <lho...@nic.cz> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> regarding $subj:
>>
>> - What about extensions? Do modules defining them have to be
>> implemented? That is,
1 - 100 of 1028 matches
Mail list logo
