Re: [netmod] WGLC - Comparison of NMDA datastores - draft-ietf-netmod-nmda-diff-03

Hi, Joel Jaeggli wrote: > Greetings, > > This was supposed to get processed shortly after IETF 106, however I lost > track of it. We are therefore running a 2 week WGLC on > draft-ietf-netmod-nmda-diff-03. > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-nmda-diff/ > > the 02 - 03

Re: [netmod] Question on how to design a Yang model to reflect auto-asignment of a give leaf

Oscar González de Dios wrote: > > > -Mensaje original----- > De: Martin Bjorklund > Enviado el: martes, 11 de febrero de 2020 11:00 > Para: Oscar González de Dios > CC: ops...@ietf.org; netmod@ietf.org > Asunto: Re: [netmod] Question on how to design a Yang

Re: [netmod] Question on how to design a Yang model to reflect auto-asignment of a give leaf

Hi, Oscar González de Dios wrote: > Dear OPSAWG and Netmod colleagues, > > During last IETF Opsawg meeting we raised a question (and > there was some discussion during the meeting) that we have > found yet no good answer and we would like to

Re: [netmod] Schema mount and Network Instance model

Hi, Mahesh Jethanandani wrote: > The network-instances YANG model [RFC8529] gives an example in > Appendix A.1 of how > to use schema mount to mount the routing protocol. An example modeled > along those lines for the BGP YANG model, and

Re: [netmod] Text in import to indicate whether a module is needed as import-only or as implemented

Hi I agree w/ Andy and others that we should not add this to the import's description. I don't think this kind of conformance text belongs to the import's description. If you think it is important to state this, the best place is probably as plain text in the document itself. /martin

Re: [netmod] Query about must statement syntax

Hi, "Ivory, William" wrote: > Hi, > > I've got a must statement that causes a compilation error on a Cisco NCS > device (admittedly ancient (NCS version 3.4.4), but can't update it), as > follows: > > must "(../../packets * current()) <= (../../interval * 1000)"; > > Error is 'error: XPath

Re: [netmod] Question on YANG 'fraction-digit' statement

Hi, "Ivory, William" wrote: > Hi, > > I've got a question about the 'fraction-digit' statement which I'm > hoping someone can clarify. I know it is used to specify the range of > valid values, as shown (in part) in the table below: > > >

Re: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-factory-default-08.txt

Hi, "Joe Clarke (jclarke)" wrote: > On Dec 4, 2019, at 22:37, Qin Wu wrote: > > v-08 is posted to address comments received from YANG doctor review and > additional comments from Joe. > The diff is: > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-netmod-factory-default-08 > > Thanks, Qin.

Re: [netmod] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-data-ext-04: (with COMMENT)

Hi, See one more reply inline. Martin Bjorklund wrote: > Hi, > > Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker wrote: > > Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for > > draft-ietf-netmod-yang-data-ext-04: No Objection > > > > When responding, please keep

Re: [netmod] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-data-ext-04: (with COMMENT)

Roman Danyliw via Datatracker wrote: > Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-netmod-yang-data-ext-04: No Objection > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut

Re: [netmod] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-data-ext-04: (with COMMENT)

Hi, Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker wrote: > Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-netmod-yang-data-ext-04: No Objection > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to

Re: [netmod] Question about schema-mount

Hi, "Bogaert, Bart (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)" wrote: > Hi Martin, > > -Original Message----- > From: Martin Bjorklund > Sent: Thursday, November 28, 2019 9:28 AM > To: Bogaert, Bart (Nokia - BE/Antwerp) > Cc: netmod@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [netmod] Q

Re: [netmod] Question about schema-mount

Hi, "Bogaert, Bart (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)" wrote: > Hi, > > We're trying to figure out whether it is possible to define a module > in the parent schema which would use a node being a leafref to a node > in a model under a mount point. In order for this to work, the leafref target would have to

Re: [netmod] IANA registries and YANG

Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to discuss the issue of developing YANG modules that > mirror IANA registries. The main objection, raised in DNSOP WG in > relation to draft-lhotka-dnsop-iana-class-type-yang-02, was that the > RFC containing the initial revision of the module

Re: [netmod] comments on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-instance-file-format-04

Balázs Lengyel wrote: > > > -Original Message- > From: Martin Bjorklund > Sent: 2019. november 18., hétfő 0:53 > To: Balázs Lengyel > Cc: a...@yumaworks.com; netmod@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [netmod] comments on > draft-ietf-netmod-yang-instance-file-format

Re: [netmod] comments on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-instance-file-format-04

Hi, Balázs Lengyel wrote: > See below BALAZS2. > -Original Message- > From: Martin Bjorklund > Sent: 2019. november 7., csütörtök 16:17 > To: Balázs Lengyel > Cc: a...@yumaworks.com; netmod@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [netmod] comments on > draft-ietf-netmod-yang

Re: [netmod] comments on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-instance-file-format-04

Andy Bierman wrote: > On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 2:40 PM Balázs Lengyel > wrote: > > > See below!Balazs > > > > > > > > *From:* netmod *On Behalf Of *Andy Bierman > > *Sent:* 2019. október 10., csütörtök 17:34 > > *To:* Martin Bjorklu

Re: [netmod] comments on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-instance-file-format-04

Balázs Lengyel wrote: > See below!Balazs > > > > From: netmod On Behalf Of Andy Bierman > Sent: 2019. október 10., csütörtök 17:34 > To: Martin Bjorklund > Cc: NetMod WG > Subject: Re: [netmod] comments on > draft-ietf-netmo

Re: [netmod] comments on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-instance-file-format-04

Hi, Balázs Lengyel wrote: > Hello Martin, > I will update the draft following most of your comments. See details below. > Regards Balazs > > -Original Message- > From: netmod On Behalf Of Martin Bjorklund > Sent: 2019. október 10., csütörtök 14:05 > To: n

[netmod] Fw: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-sub-intf-vlan-model-05

Hi Rob, You haven't replied to my WGLC email below, and it seems the issues I brought up are not fixed in -06. Did you miss this email? /martin --- Begin Message --- Hi, Here is my (late) review of draft-ietf-netmod-sub-intf-vlan-model-05. o 1 The YANG module names are not correct; they

Re: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-factory-default-04.txt

Qin Wu wrote: > 发件人: netmod [mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org] 代表 Kent Watsen > 发送时间: 2019年11月6日 3:27 > 收件人: john heasley > 抄送: netmod@ietf.org > 主题: Re: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-factory-default-04.txt > > > > Yes, I'm suggesting that this "clearing" be a requirement, even if the

Re: [netmod] Default choice case with only empty leaf - Is this allowed ?

Hi, "Beauville, Yves (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)" wrote: > Hello, > > In the example provided in section 7.9.3 of RFC7950, is it legal to > redefine the default case like below? > > container transfer { >    choice how { > default manual; // redefined > case

Re: [netmod] x509c2n:cert-to-name problem

Kent Watsen wrote: > > >> First, let me demote (2) from a SHOULD to a MAY, since there is a > >> workaround. > >> > >> The thinking is that it may be common for deployments to use the same > >> "cert-to-name" strategy everywhere (e.g., IDevID certificates), and > >> hence there is no need to

Re: [netmod] x509c2n:cert-to-name problem

Kent Watsen wrote: > > Hi Martin, > > > I have now filed an errata for this issue. > > Ack. > > > However, I remember that we had a discussion on whether we should > > accept erratas on YANG modules or not. The YANG module exist in > > various places outside of the RFC, such as the IANA

Re: [netmod] x509c2n:cert-to-name problem

Randy Presuhn wrote: > Hi - > > On 10/28/2019 2:22 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > > No, in many SMIv2 objects, a zero-length value is used for optional > > nodes (due to the way the protocol (SNMP) works). > > This comes as a complete surprise to me.

Re: [netmod] x509c2n:cert-to-name problem

Hi, Kent Watsen wrote: > Hi Martin, > > > > I'll check with my co-author and get back. > > Thanks. I have now filed an errata for this issue. However, I remember that we had a discussion on whether we should accept erratas on YANG modules or not. The YANG module exist in various places

Re: [netmod] x509c2n:cert-to-name problem

Kent Watsen wrote: > > > > On Oct 23, 2019, at 4:18 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > Since this is a problem with ietf-x509-cert-to-name I reply to this > > question here, rather than buried in a reply to another issue for > >

Re: [netmod] Effect of ordered by user on state(config false) list

Hi, Tarek Saad wrote: > Hi, > > We are wondering if “ordered by user” has any effect on a (config > false)/state list? > Given RFC6020 specifies “ordered by system” as the default order, does > this mean it is the order assumed for a state list with “ordered by > user”? There is no effect "on

[netmod] x509c2n:cert-to-name problem [WAS: [netconf-wg/https-notif] What is the user-id of the entity sending the notification? (#3)]

Hi, Since this is a problem with ietf-x509-cert-to-name I reply to this question here, rather than buried in a reply to another issue for another document ;-) Kent Watsen wrote: > Separately, I just noticed an issue with the > `ietf-[net/rest]conf-server` modules using x509c2n:cert-to-name. >

Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 (5879)

Hi, The problem is that it is not clear that we can use this new definition with the rest of the text in the RFC that uses this term. For example, section 7.1.5 talks about "the imported module's schema tree", and this doesn't really work if the schema tree is not tied to a module. Also the

Re: [netmod] A reworking of RFC8343

tom petch wrote: > Martin > > I am wondering how much you know about a module that says > WG List: <mailto:netmod@ietf.org> > Editor: Martin Bjorklund > <mailto:m...@tail-f.com>"; > > The module is > module ietf-uc

Re: [netmod] Alexey Melnikov's No Objection on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-data-ext-04: (with COMMENT)

"Alexey Melnikov" wrote: > Hi Martin, > > On Mon, Oct 21, 2019, at 8:33 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > > > This is a fine document. > > > > > > Can you show and example similar to what in A.3 with 2 addressbook > > > entries? > &g

Re: [netmod] YANG 1.0 module uses a grouping from a 1.1 module and the grouping contains 1.1 XPath functions?

Jernej Tuljak wrote: > Should I clarify my question? > > Jernej > > On 10/10/2019 10:36, Jernej Tuljak wrote: > > Hi, > > > > there is at least one YANG 1.0 standard module that imports and uses > > groupings from a YANG 1.1 standard module and at least one such > > grouping contains must/when

Re: [netmod] leafref and identityref

Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > On Mon, 2019-10-21 at 13:40 +0200, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > consider the following situation: > > > > > > module A { > > >

Re: [netmod] leafref and identityref

Hi, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > Hi, > > consider the following situation: > > module A { > ... > prefix a > identity X; > leaf foo { > type identityref { > base X; > } > } > } > > module B { > ... > import A { > prefix a; > } > leaf fooref { > type leafref

Re: [netmod] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-netmod-yang-data-ext-04

Hi, Brian Carpenter via Datatracker wrote: > Reviewer: Brian Carpenter > Review result: Ready with Nits > > Gen-ART Last Call & telechat review of draft-ietf-netmod-yang-data-ext-04 > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area > Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF

Re: [netmod] Alexey Melnikov's No Objection on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-data-ext-04: (with COMMENT)

Alexey Melnikov via Datatracker wrote: > Alexey Melnikov has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-netmod-yang-data-ext-04: No Objection > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut

Re: [netmod] Barry Leiba's No Objection on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-data-ext-04: (with COMMENT)

Hi, Barry Leiba via Datatracker wrote: > Barry Leiba has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-netmod-yang-data-ext-04: No Objection > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut

Re: [netmod] IANA registries

Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > Hi, > > some of you have probably seen the discussions around > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-lhotka-dnsop-iana-class-type-yang-02 > > We proposed to adopt it as a work item in the DNSOP WG, but despite > some support this is probably not going to happen. The

[netmod] comments on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-instance-file-format-04

Hi, I have some mostly cosmetic comments on this draft. o "YANG" should be spelled "YANG". Not Yang etc. o "NETCONF" should be spelled "NETCONF". o leaf-list module The type of this leaf-list is a string with: pattern '.+@\d{4}-\d{2}-\d{2}\.yang'; I think the

Re: [netmod] ?==?utf-8?q? PYANG refine fault ?

Michal Vaško wrote: > Hi, > > yanglint actually validates the module just fine (at least the latest > version) once the grammar errors are fixed. Namely, the spaces before > ";" on lines 191 and 199 are removed. These are not errors. You are allowed to have any number of whitespace (and

Re: [netmod] PYANG refine fault ?

Hi, Balázs Lengyel wrote: > Hello, > > I was trying to validate the attached model. However pyang keeps complaining > about refining a default for a leaf-list: > > > > ietf-notification-capabilit...@2019-10-10.yang:184: error: "leaf-list" node >

Re: [netmod] References to the "tags" typedef

"Rob Wilton (rwilton)" wrote: > [Copying Balazs because this discussion is moving to instance-data > document schema definitions.] > > > -Original Message- > > From: Schönwälder, Jürgen > > Sent: 04 October 2019 10:36 > > To: Rob Wilton (rwilton) > > Cc: Christian Hopps ; Mahesh

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-yang-data-ext version 4

Hi, Thank you for your reviewe. Comments inline. Qin Wu wrote: > Hi, Auhors: > I have read the latest version and have the following comments: > > 1. Try to understand the difference between anydata and YANG data > structure extension? Is YANG data structure extension targeted to > specify

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-yang-data-ext version 4

Hi, Thank you for the review. Comments inline. "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" wrote: > Hi, > > I've reviewed this document, and other than 2 minor nits, I believe > that it is ready for publication. > > Two minor comments: > > > 1. Section 1.1.1 NMDA. There should be a comma before "and are >

Re: [netmod] IPR check draft-ietf-netmod-yang-data-ext-04

Joel Jaeggli wrote: > Authors, Contributors, WG, > > As part of WG Last Call for draft-ietf-netmod-yang-data-ext-04 > > Are you aware of any IPR that applies to drafts identified above? No, I'm not aware of any IPR that applies to this draft /martin > > Please state either: > > "No, I'm

Re: [netmod] 答复: 答复: Please clarify implementation about ‘when’

Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > On Thu, 2019-09-26 at 11:04 +, Schönwälder, Jürgen wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 12:27:17PM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > > > > Sure, one can discuss whether this feature is useful or harmful > > > > but the only way to officially remove this is to create a new

Re: [netmod] 答复: 答复: Please clarify implementation about ‘when’

Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > On Thu, 2019-09-26 at 08:56 +0200, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > > > Andy Bierman writes: > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 8:44 AM Sterne, Jason (Nokia - CA/O

Re: [netmod] 答复: 答复: Please clarify implementation about ‘when’

Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > Andy Bierman writes: > > > On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 8:44 AM Sterne, Jason (Nokia - CA/Ottawa) < > > jason.ste...@nokia.com> wrote: > > > >> Processing order should not matter. The evaluation of the 'when' statement > >> should be done assuming an atomic application of

Re: [netmod] Processing open errata in the the netmod working group

Joel Jaeggli wrote: > Folks, > > Over the course of this we we intend to process reported errata that > we have outstanding in netmod I started to go through the list and comment, but then I realized that you probably didn't ask for comments? This was just a FYI? /martin

Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 (5807)

Warren Kumari wrote: > [ - RFC Ed (for clutter), + Benoit (who verified > https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid4794) ] > > I'm trying to go through and clean up the outstanding Ops and > Management Errata. I'm completely, 100% not a YANG / netmod person (I > cannot even spell YANG!), but I

Re: [netmod] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7950 (5642)

Warren Kumari wrote: > On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 1:53 PM Andy Bierman wrote: > > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 10:33 AM Martin Bjorklund wrote: > >> > >> Andy Bierman wrote: > >> > On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 10:07 AM Peter Loborg >

Re: [netmod] Alissa Cooper's Abstain on draft-ietf-netmod-artwork-folding-09: (with COMMENT)

Erik Auerswald wrote: > Hi Martin, > > On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 05:17:30PM +0200, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > Kent Watsen wrote: > > > > > > >> There has been discussion about how embedding YANG models in RFCs > > > >> seems like a >

Re: [netmod] Alissa Cooper's Abstain on draft-ietf-netmod-artwork-folding-09: (with COMMENT)

Kent Watsen wrote: > > > >> There has been discussion about how embedding YANG models in RFCs seems > >> like a > >> poor fit for a number of reasons. By standardizing line-folding mechanisms > >> and > >> claiming them as a best practice, this document reinforces the root of that > >>

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

"Rob Wilton (rwilton)" wrote: > Hi Martin, > > Please see comments inline ... > > > -Original Message- > > From: Martin Bjorklund > > Sent: 22 August 2019 12:35 > > To: Rob Wilton (rwilton) > > Cc: vladi...@transpacket.com; netmod@ie

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-sub-intf-vlan-model-05

Hi, Here is my (late) review of draft-ietf-netmod-sub-intf-vlan-model-05. o 1 The YANG module names are not correct; they are listed as: if-l3-vlan.yang - Defines the model for basic classification of VLAN tagged traffic to L3 transport services

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

Martin Bjorklund wrote: > Hi, > > Some comments inline. > > > "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" wrote: > > Hi Vladimir, > > > > Thanks for your detailed review. Sorry for the slow reply, I've been > > away. I'm also about to be away again for a co

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

Hi, Some comments inline. "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" wrote: > Hi Vladimir, > > Thanks for your detailed review. Sorry for the slow reply, I've been > away. I'm also about to be away again for a couple of days. > > Please see my comments inline ... > > I'll also track these issues to closure

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

Hi, Here is my (late) review of draft-ietf-netmod-intf-ext-yang-07. It is a well-written document and my comments are mostly minor. o Abstract OLD: The YANG data model in this document conforms to the Network Management Datastore Architecture (NMDA) defined in RFC 8342. NEW:

Re: [netmod] RFC8526 and 'derived-from-or-self(datastore, "ds:operational")'

Hi, Jernej Tuljak wrote: > Hi, > > I'm trying to determine who is at fault, our YANG validator > implementation or the module ietf-netconf-nmda in RFC8526 . > > There is a "when" expression at line 193 within this module > > when 'derived-from-or-self(datastore, "ds:operational") '; > >

Re: [netmod] 答复: FW: a question about ietf-hardware yang module

Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 09:52:20AM +0200, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 10:04:50PM +0200, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > > > Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > > > >

Re: [netmod] 答复: FW: a question about ietf-hardware yang module

Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 10:04:50PM +0200, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 09:52:56PM +0200, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > > > > Yes, good point, I think the phrase "by a

Re: [netmod] 答复: FW: a question about ietf-hardware yang module

Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 09:52:56PM +0200, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > > Yes, good point, I think the phrase "by a different hardware > > > component" should be removed. It seems last-change should change when > > > I unplu

Re: [netmod] 答复: FW: a question about ietf-hardware yang module

Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 04:59:08PM +0200, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > > > Sounds reasonable. But what exactly does "replaced by a different > > component" mean? Presumably it has the same name, but something else > > is d

Re: [netmod] 答复: FW: a question about ietf-hardware yang module

Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 02:13:03AM +, Fengchong (frank) wrote: > > > > > > I think the ambiguity is 'list changed' - does this mean that list > > > entries are added/removed or does it include also the case where a > > > property of a list entry has changed.

Re: [netmod] ?= ?==?utf-8?q? mandatory choice with non-presence container cas

Michal Vaško wrote: > Hi Rob, > actually, I have used model with the container TOP just for > simplification, I have encountered the issue while implementing > ietf-ssh-server model from its current draft. I have created the > container "users" [1] without any "user" list instances. Now, you may

Re: [netmod] ?= ?==?utf-8?q? mandatory choice with non-presence container cas

Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > Kent Watsen writes: > > > Hi Michal, > >> I agree, but these valid data were correctly printed into invalid > >> data. I do not think printing is allowed to change the validity of > >> data. > > The NP-container text is unclear. > > This issue IMO has more to do

Re: [netmod] FW: a question about ietf-hardware yang module

Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 09:13:51AM +0200, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I don't understand what is unclear about the current descriptions. Is > > it the relations to the MIB objects that are unclear or is it the > >

Re: [netmod] FW: a question about ietf-hardware yang module

Hi, I don't understand what is unclear about the current descriptions. Is it the relations to the MIB objects that are unclear or is it the descriptions in the YANG module? The original question was: My question is whether only configuration change of hardware component will cause the

Re: [netmod] Yang Schema mount implementation

Balazs Lengyel wrote: > Hello, > > Who has implemented YANG schema mount? Are there SW tools already > implementing it? We have implemented YANG schema mount in our NSO product. /martin ___ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org

Re: [netmod] regular expression flavours (again)

Robert Varga wrote: > On 12/06/2019 11:25, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > > That said, they do seem to declare something like > > oc-ext:regexp-posix; but it would have been much smarter to use for > > example oc-posix:regex instead of changing the semantics of the > > pattern statement. > >

Re: [netmod] Ip layer statistics in Yang ?

Hi, Karen Elisabeth Egede Nielsen wrote: > Hi Steve, All > > I hope that you may advice on this issue. > > I am looking for the YANG modeling of the IP "interface" statistics > (aka RFC4293) and stumbled over the now expired individual > contribution >

Re: [netmod] A question on the parameter overriding in draft-ietf-isis-yang-isis-cfg

Hi, Qin Wu wrote: > I think what they are looking for in RFC7950 is generic overridden > rule, i.e., a parent node statement can be overridden by its child > node substatement. See Per's reply to the netmod list. In summary, in this case you should do: container priority { leaf value {

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-artwork-folding-02

Kent Watsen wrote: > > > Hi Martin, > > Thanks for your review. > > > > I have reviewed draft-ietf-netmod-artwork-folding-02, and here are my > > comments: [...] > > The algorithm talks specifically about space (' ') rather than > > whitespace. > > True and, FWIW, this was the only

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-artwork-folding-02

Kent Watsen wrote: > > > > [RW] > > Yes, I think that is better, and probably OK. > > > > I still slightly question “One strategy is based on the time-proven use of > > a single backslash ('\') character to indicate where line-folding has > > occurred, with the continuation occurring with

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-artwork-folding-02

Hi, I have reviewed draft-ietf-netmod-artwork-folding-02, and here are my comments: o 6 Perhaps: OLD: begins at the first non- whitespace character on the following line. NEW: begins at the first character that is not a space character (' ') on the following line.

Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-wu-netmod-factory-default-02

tom petch wrote: > - Original Message - > From: "Joe Clarke (jclarke)" > Sent: Monday, May 06, 2019 4:11 PM > > > > On May 6, 2019, at 08:06, Qin Wu > mailto:bill...@huawei.com>> wrote: > > > > Hi, Chairs: > > Sorry for late follow up, thanks Jurgen, Andy,Joe, Joel and all others > for

Re: [netmod] 6021 ipv4-prefix

Kristian Larsson wrote: > > > On 2019-04-25 23:51, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 11:20:57PM +0200, Kristian Larsson wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 2019-04-18 13:12, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > >>> On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 12:53:22PM +0200, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: >

Re: [netmod] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7950 (5698)

Hi, This errata is correct and should be accepted. /martin RFC Errata System wrote: > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7950, > "The YANG 1.1 Data Modeling Language". > > -- > You may review the report below and at: >

Re: [netmod] 6991bis: address-with-prefix-length

Kristian Larsson wrote: > > > On 2019-04-18 14:18, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > >> On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 10:41:11AM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> I am not in favour of adding this

Re: [netmod] 6991bis: address-with-prefix-length

Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 03:14:20PM +0200, Per Hedeland wrote: > > > Agreed - except the not entirely minor nit that the thing after the > > "/" is not a prefix but a *prefix-length*. Another way of putting it > > is that the IP address is a property of an

Re: [netmod] 6991bis: address-with-prefix-length

Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 02:18:43PM +0200, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > > > > It > > > is sometimes convenient to treat something that is in fact constructed > > > as an atomic value. > > > > Conve

Re: [netmod] 6991bis: address-with-prefix-length

Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 10:41:11AM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > > > > > > > > I am not in favour of adding this type. Having ip-prefix next to > > > > ip-address-and-prefix is confusing. > > > > > > Confusing or not, they are NOT interchangeable and actually do

Re: [netmod] IANA modules

Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > Martin Bjorklund píše v St 10. 04. 2019 v 15:15 +0200: > > Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > > > Martin Bjorklund píše v St 10. 04. 2019 v 14:26 +0200: > > > > Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > >

Re: [netmod] IANA modules

Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > Martin Bjorklund píše v St 10. 04. 2019 v 14:26 +0200: > > Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > in a discussion in the yang-doctors mailing list, Acee noted that > > > IANA probably hasn't yet implemented a procedure

Re: [netmod] IANA modules

Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > Hi, > > in a discussion in the yang-doctors mailing list, Acee noted that > IANA probably hasn't yet implemented a procedure for updating YANG > modules corresponding to IANA registries I think that this is a false alarm. IANA updates the modules according to the

Re: [netmod] YAng-Tree for a YANG structure

Hi, Balázs Lengyel wrote: > Hello, > > In draft-ietf-netmod-yang-data-ext the extension structure is > defined. In my draft about > instance data format I plan to use this in a YANG model. Kent raised > the question about > providing a YANG Tree description of the model. > > Is there any idea

Re: [netmod] Doubts about static routes in RFC 8349

ng "static". /martin > > > > Regards, and lots of thanks in advance, > > Sasha > > > > Office: +972-39266302 > > Cell: +972-549266302 > > Email: alexander.vainsht...@ecitele.com > > > > -Original Messag

Re: [netmod] Doubts about static routes in RFC 8349

Hi, Alexander Vainshtein wrote: [...] > Meanwhile, could you please explain the rationale for changing the > data model that has been defined in RFC 4292 (where both the > destination prefix and the next hop have been parts of the index in > the appropriate MIB table) ? > > The side effect of

Re: [netmod] 6991bis: address-with-prefix-length

here other uses cases as well? > > Thanks, > Rob > > > > -----Original Message- > > From: Acee Lindem (acee) > > Sent: 02 April 2019 16:52 > > To: Rob Wilton (rwilton) ; Martin Bjorklund > > > f.com>; j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de

Re: [netmod] 6991bis: address-with-prefix-length

Hi, Michael Rehder wrote: [...] > Note also that the ietf pattern regexp are not anchored so > " junk192.168.1.1" > and > "192.168.1.1 " > Are accepted. No, this is not correct. YANG uses the XSD "dialect" of regular expressions. In this dialect, all patterns are implicitly anchored.

Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 (5663)

Ebben Aries wrote: > On Mar 19 23:27 PM, Robert Varga wrote: > > On 19/03/2019 19:12, Rob Wilton (rwilton) wrote: > > > Hi Ebben, > > > > > > I've always taken the ABNF to list the definitive sub-statements that are > > > allowed for the various deviate "add", "replace", or "delete" options.

Re: [netmod] instance data new backward compatibility text

Hi I agree with Juergen. I think section 6 should be removed. This document should specify the document format (which it does), but it shouldn't specify specific rules for the different use cases. /martin Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > Your rules are use case specific and I am not

Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-chopps-netmod-geo-location-01

Kent Watsen wrote: > This email begins a 2-week adoption poll for: > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-chopps-netmod-geo-location-01 > > Please voice your support or objections before April 8. I support the adoption of this draft. /martin

Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-schoenw-netmod-rfc6991-bis-00

Kent Watsen wrote: > This email begins a 2-week adoption poll for: > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-schoenw-netmod-rfc6991-bis-00 > > Please voice your support or objections before April 8. I support the adoption of this draft. /martin

Re: [netmod] Comments on instance data draft rev -02

Joe Clarke wrote: > First, I agree with Jürgen that the "target" terminology confused me, +1 > especially so given you have target-module and inline-target-spec. Like > Jürgen and Rob said, "schema" seems to work better. Since we have "content-data", perhaps use "content-schema"? And a

Re: [netmod] adoption poll for yang-versioning-reqs-02

Andy Bierman wrote: > On Sun, Mar 24, 2019 at 11:39 AM Joel Jaeggli wrote: > > > > > > > On Mar 22, 2019, at 12:07, Lou Berger wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > Thank you all for the good input on this thread. > > > > With the understanding that a 00 working group document is a starting > > point for

Re: [netmod] import-by-semver issue

Andy Bierman wrote: > On Sun, Mar 24, 2019 at 9:14 AM Juergen Schoenwaelder < > j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de> wrote: > > > On Sun, Mar 24, 2019 at 03:14:18PM +, Rob Wilton (rwilton) wrote: > > > > > > But that is true of YANG compilers today. If there are multiple > > revisions of a

Re: [netmod] import-by-semver issue

"Rob Wilton (rwilton)" wrote: > Hi Juergen, > > > -Original Message- > > From: Juergen Schoenwaelder > > Sent: 24 March 2019 15:31 > > To: Rob Wilton (rwilton) > > Cc: Andy Bierman ; NetMod WG > > Subject: Re: [netmod] import-by-semver issue > > > > On Sun, Mar 24, 2019 at 02:07:15PM

Re: [netmod] guidelines for top-level nodes in RFC 8407

Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > On Fri, 2019-03-22 at 10:24 +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > Hi, > > > > RFC 8407, section 4.10 says: > > > >A mandatory database data definition is defined as a node that a > >client must provide fo

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >