Andy Bierman <a...@yumaworks.com> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 1:32 AM, Martin Bjorklund <m...@tail-f.com> wrote: > > > Ladislav Lhotka <lho...@nic.cz> wrote: > > > Martin Bjorklund <m...@tail-f.com> writes: > > > > > > > Robert Wilton <rwil...@cisco.com> wrote: > > > >> Hi, > > > >> > > > >> The definition of "status" in RFC 7950 in section 7.21.2 (full text > > > >> below), states: > > > >> > > > >> If no status is specified, the default is "current". > > > >> > > > >> From my interpretation of the text in the draft, this implies that the > > > >> status of the "new" child leaf in the following example is "current", > > > >> and that this example is allowed! > > > >> > > > >> My questions are: > > > >> - Is my interpretation of the current text correct? > > > > > > > > Yes. > > > > > > > >> - Is this actually the best behaviour, or should it inherit like the > > > >> config statement? > > > > > > > > I think the idea was that if the status != current, it is better for > > > > the reader if it is explicitly stated. > > > > > > > >> Should I raise an errata for this? > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > However, we could have said that a current node under a deprecated > > > > node (etc) in the same module is an error, in order to force people > > > > (through the useage of YANG validators) to detect and fix this. > > > > > > Since "current" is the default, correctly deprecating a subtree would > > > mean to explicitly add the "status" statement to every single node in > > > the subtree. > > > > Yes. > > > > Please explain what it means for YANG to say > "The parent node is deprecated and going away but the child nodes are not. > They are current and are staying around." This does not seem to make any > sense.
Agreed. But this should be invalid also if the status statements are given explicitly: container a { status deprecated; container b { status current; } } > Clearly an obsolete node removes all access of its descendant nodes. > There is no way to access /foo/child if /foo has been removed from the > server. Yes. > So how do I access a deprecated /foo/child node inside an obsolete /foo > container? You can't. /martin _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod