Hi,
Xufeng Liu <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Kent, > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Kent Watsen [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: Thursday, February 2, 2017 8:39 PM > > To: Xufeng Liu <[email protected]> > > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [i2rs] Kathleen Moriarty's No Objection on > > draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l3- > > topology-08: (with COMMENT) > > > > [reducing distribution] > > > > > > Hi Xufeng, > > > > > Assume the following model: > > > > > > +--rw nodes > > > +--rw node [id] > > > +--rw id string > > > +--rw under-lay-attribute-a ??? > > > +---ro nodes-state > > > +--ro node [id] > > > +--ro id string > > > +--ro attribute-a string > > > > > > I cannot define the under-lay-attribute-a to reference attribute-a as: > > > type leafref { > > > path "../node/attribute-a"' > > > } > > > > > > True, but maybe it could be: > > > > type leafref { > > path "../node/attribute-a" > > require-instance false; > > description > > "In the case when the referenced instance is not a configured > > object, the system may resolve it by looking for it under the > > /nodes-state node. As the referenced operational state data > > may have a lifecycle independent of configuration, this results > > in an effect much like pre-provisioning interfaces in RFC 7223."; > > } > [Xufeng] I think that "require-instance false" does not help here. The > validation for path "../node/attribute-a" still fails because > "attribute-a" does not exist under /nodes/node/. No, "require-instance false" essentially turns off validation. Section 9.9.3 in RFC 7950 says: If "require-instance" is "false", it means that the instance being referred to MAY exist in valid data. /martin _______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
