All,
This message arose from a yang-multic...@ietf.org
<mailto:yang-multic...@ietf.org> “draft-ietf-pim-igmp-mld-yang-02.txt: YANG
compilation isuse” (sic) thread
<https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/yang-multicast/current/threads.html#00232>
initiated by Benoit.
I thought it would be useful for NETMOD to see the part of the discussion that
relates to implemented versus imported YANG modules.
Benoit Claise reported this warning:
warn: Schema node "ietf-ip:ipv4" not found
(/ietf-interfaces:interfaces/ietf-interfaces:interface[ietf-interfaces:name =
current()]/ietf-ip:ipv4)
Radek Krejčí replied:
These warnings are printed because in yanglint, until explicitly stated, the
imported modules (such as ietf-interfaces and ietf-ip), are supposed to be only
imported, not implemented. The data nodes in imported schemas are not
available, which is the reason of these warnings.
William Lupton (that’s me!) asked / commented:
Why are the complaints only about ip:ipv4 (etc) and not about if:interfaces
(etc), which are also referenced in the must statements?
This makes it hard for an automated tool (such as Benoit’s) because it needs to
know which other YANG files to process in addition to the “file of interest”.
Radek Krejčí replied:
According to RFC 7950, sec 5.6.6 (3rd paragraph) [ED: 5.6.5?], when an
implemented module augments another module (ietf-interfaces), the augmented
module MUST be also implemented. So libyang automatically changes the augmented
module from imported to the implemented. The same rule applies also in case of
referring a module in path (leafref) and by deviating a module. But it does not
apply when a module data is used in must or when conditions. That's the reason
why it complains just about ietf-ip and not about ietf-interfaces.
YANG actually does not provide a way to specify that a particular import is
also expected to be implemented. Therefore, libyang needs some help with
setting modules implemented - all the explicitly loaded modules are supposed to
be implemented, if the module is just implicitly loaded from the search
directory and user did not expressed that it is supposed to be implemented, it
is kept only imported to provide groupings or type definitions
Benoit Claise asked (referring to my reference to automated tools):
Would it be possible to improve the warning (and the related test, by testing
implemented instead of import), basically telling that the module itself is
fine?
I’m interested to know that NETMOD thinks about this distinction between
implemented versus imported (in the absence of any instance documents). I guess
my (maybe naive) view is that if all I’m doing is checking for errors in my
YANG model then I don’t care about this. If my YANG is good I want to see no
warnings or errors, and if it’s bad then I want to be told this (and why).
Thanks,
William
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
