William,
The when clause determines whether the node will be instantiated or not.
Only when it is instantiated (when condition evaluates to true), the default
property comes into the picture. At least, that is how I interpret it.
Best regards - Vriendelijke groeten,
Bart Bogaert
-Original
mod-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Bogaert, Bart
(Nokia - BE/Antwerp)
Sent: 29 March 2017 12:47
To: netmod@ietf.org
Subject: [netmod] Question about must statement in grouping
Hi,
We have a question on the usage of a must statement within a grouping.
Assume the following grouping
groupi
Hi,
We have a question on the usage of a must statement within a grouping.
Assume the following grouping
grouping a-group {
list a-list {
must "count(.) != 1" {
description
"This list must either be empty or have at least 2 elements";
}
key "entry";
, Bart (Nokia - BE/Antwerp) <bart.boga...@nokia.com>; Bogaert,
Bart (Nokia - BE/Antwerp) <bart.boga...@nokia.com>; netmod@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netmod] Question about must statement in grouping
"Bogaert, Bart (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)" <bart.boga...@nokia.com> writes
Hi,
Just to get confirmation on my assumptions:
In section 4.7.3 the origin metadata does not include 'running' as origin
but only 'intended'. So it seems to be mandatory for a NC server to support
the intended datastore?
With the introduction of the operational datastore I assume it
]
Sent: Friday, August 04, 2017 8:29 AM
To: Andy Bierman <a...@yumaworks.com>
Cc: Bogaert, Bart (Nokia - BE/Antwerp) <bart.boga...@nokia.com>;
netmod@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netmod] Questions on NMDA and "merged config and state"
On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 10:06:23AM -0700, Andy Bier
On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 12:49 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder
<j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de
<mailto:j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de> > wrote:
On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 06:59:58AM +0000, Bogaert, Bart (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)
wrote:
>
> Just to get confirmation on my assumptio
Hello,
Within BBF we have had a discussion on the use of
draft-ietf-netmod-entity-03, and we would appreciate to hear the opinion of
IETF. More specific the discussion is on the use of the leaf 'class' and the
leaf 'parent-rel-pos'.
First some BBF context:
- the systems for which BBF
jacobs-university.de]
Sent: Saturday, August 05, 2017 10:36 AM
To: Bogaert, Bart (Nokia - BE/Antwerp) <bart.boga...@nokia.com>
Cc: Andy Bierman <a...@yumaworks.com>; netmod@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netmod] Questions on NMDA and "merged config and state"
On Fri, Aug 04, 2017
-identities
to continue and align later when there would be standardized HW
sub-identities.
Best regards, Bart
-Original Message-
From: Martin Bjorklund [mailto:m...@tail-f.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2017 1:02 PM
To: Bogaert, Bart (Nokia - BE/Antwerp) <bart.boga...@nokia.com>
Cc:
Hi,
We have a question regarding the statistics container as defined in the
interfaces-state model. This container defines one mandatory leaf
(discontinuity-time) while all other leafs are optional. What is the
rationale behind this leaf being mandatory and not an optional field?
It does
adimir Vassilev <vladi...@transpacket.com>; Andy Bierman
<a...@yumaworks.com>; Bogaert, Bart (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)
<bart.boga...@nokia.com>; netmod@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netmod] Question on intefaces-state model
On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 10:15:22AM +0100, Robert Wilton wrote:
>
&
-Original Message-
From: Martin Bjorklund [mailto:m...@tail-f.com]
Sent: Monday, August 28, 2017 1:12 PM
To: Bogaert, Bart (Nokia - BE/Antwerp) <bart.boga...@nokia.com>
Cc: netmod@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netmod] draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis-13 - section 4.26.2
Hi,
"Bogaert,
Hello,
In the interfaces module we notice support of if-mib feature indicating
whether the IF-MIB is supported or not. Part of this feature is a flag to
indicate whether an SNMP link-up/down trap has to be generated or not.
Looking at the YANG model itself we notice that it does not foresee
Hello,
The latest draft does not contain an appendix with the deprecated state tree
(to support the non-NMDA model as specified in RFC6087bis section 4.23.3),
so if it is published in this way, there is an issue at the level of BBF
TR-383.
Note that the draft-ietfnetmod-rfc7223bis does include
Hi,
I've been looking in various documents w.r.t. the usage of a model revision
statement, especially in the case where the YANG model is split up in
various submodules.
Assume that one of the included submodules is changed and gets a new
revision while the model this submodule belongs-to is
Hi,
We have a question on YANG module compilation. Assume the following model:
module test-feat-compile {
yang-version 1.1;
namespace "http://www.example.com/test-feat-compile;;
prefix "tfc";
identity failure-reason {
description
"The reason a failure occurred.";
}
Hi Martin,
We had a discussion on this and we have some concerns about below statement
(behavior in the description statement):
>This leaf can be configured. The configured value is used only if
>the server cannot determine the vendor-specific serial number from
>the component
Hi,
--- snip ---
> state.”, so the above sentence only applies for the second case below.
Ok.
> 2. The second case is that something is detected but it can’t be read.
> We do not see a reason to use the value configured for the leafs
> ‘serial-num’, ‘mfg-name’ and ‘model-name’ of a matching
Hi,
We do have a question about the operational-state value 'not-present'. The
revised data store draft document mentions that for resources that are not
available (e.g. HW components) there will not be an entry for the state (see
section 5.3.2) so for equipment there will never be a state
Hi Martin,
We agree with option 2.
Regards, Bart
-Original Message-
From: Martin Bjorklund [mailto:m...@tail-f.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2018 2:47 PM
To: Bogaert, Bart (Nokia - BE/Antwerp) <bart.boga...@nokia.com>
Cc: netmod@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netmod] AD review of draf
Thanks Martin, this makes sense.
Regards, Bart
-Original Message-
From: Martin Bjorklund [mailto:m...@tail-f.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 8, 2018 9:24 AM
To: Bogaert, Bart (Nokia - BE/Antwerp) <bart.boga...@nokia.com>
Cc: netmod@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netmod] Question on
Hi,
We have a question w.r.t. deletion of entry in a list using mounted schema
knowing that in NC/Y there is no such thing as a "cascading delete" (leafref
constructions in many cases even makes it impossible to delete a resource if it
is still referred).
How does this apply to such a schema
Hi,
I'm trying to seek some clarification.
According to RFC7950 section 7.16.2:
When a notification node is defined as a child to a data node, the
element defined in [RFC5277] contains a hierarchy of
nodes that identifies the node in the datastore.
According to RFC6241 section 1.1:
datastore:
Hi,
We have a question about the following statement in the edit-config RPC section:
"If the operation contains multiple sub-operations
that apply to the same conceptual node in the underlying data
model, then the result of the operation is undefined (i.e.,
outside the scope of the NETCONF
:37 PM
To: Bogaert, Bart (Nokia - BE/Antwerp) <bart.boga...@nokia.com>; Alex Campbell
<alex.campb...@aviatnet.com>; netmod@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netmod] An abundant amount of IANA if types...
On Fri, Apr 06, 2018 at 10:51:48AM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> Juergen Schoenwaelde
age-
From: Ladislav Lhotka [mailto:lho...@nic.cz]
Sent: Friday, April 6, 2018 9:55 AM
To: Alex Campbell <alex.campb...@aviatnet.com>; Bogaert, Bart (Nokia -
BE/Antwerp) <bart.boga...@nokia.com>; netmod@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netmod] An abundant amount of IANA if types...
Hi
Hi,
We were wondering if it would make sense to introduce features in the IANA if
types YANG model to enable grouping of related interface types. This would
allow implementations to include only the types it really requires (by
supporting the related features but not the others) and (in case
Hi,
We have a question with respect to YANG models using features. Assume that a
part of the model is defined under a feature and that this feature-dependent
part defines a leaf as mandatory.
module servers {
namespace "http://www.example.com/servers;;
prefix servers;
import
and the data leafs
related to that feature are simply not there in the data configured when SW
release X was active.
Regards, Bart
From: Robert Wilton [mailto:rwil...@cisco.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 6, 2018 12:59 PM
To: Bogaert, Bart (Nokia - BE/Antwerp) <bart.boga...@nokia.com>
Cc: netmod@ie
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] Question about schema-mount
Hi,
"Bogaert, Bart (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)" wrote:
> Hi,
>
Seems that I better address this subject to ietf-netmode.
Sorry for the trouble.
Regards, Bart
From: netconf On Behalf Of Bogaert, Bart (Nokia -
BE/Antwerp)
Sent: Friday, May 8, 2020 4:55 PM
To: netc...@ietf.org
Subject: [netconf] Question related to ietf-netconf-with-defaults
Hi,
I have
Hi,
We are a little confused when reading RFC8808 (reset to factory-default
datastore) in relation to the "system configuration" source in figure 2 of
RFC8342. When correctly understanding RFC 8342, the running datastore is empty
when the system starts up after coming from the factory, and
Hi,
We are having some debate about the contents of the path element of an NACM
rule when combined with the module-name element. Assume the following rule:
nome-of-rule
some-module
/node-a/node-b/node-c
read
Hi Juergen,
Thanks for your interpretation.
-Original Message-
> From: Jürgen Schönwälder
> Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2021 11:37 AM
> To: Bogaert, Bart (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)
> Cc: netmod@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [netmod] Question on the path element of the NACM YANG m
35 matches
Mail list logo
