Hi Acee, OK – maybe this example isn’t the best. But in the general case my concern about using a super-set would be that it implies all those values are valid input values for an edit-config in the candidate/running. I can’t immediately see a clean way to indicate that some of the values aren’t valid for writing.
Another possible approach we could use is that if the value space is different, then it means we should have separate leafs. The model designer could have 1 typedef for the common values (i.e. for applied/intended config), and then use a union with additional values for the state/operational leaf that supports the extra values. Jason From: Acee Lindem (acee) [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, July 24, 2017 16:22 To: Sterne, Jason (Nokia - CA/Ottawa) <[email protected]>; [email protected] Subject: Re: [netmod] nmda-guidelines-01: value space for config vs state Hi Jason, From: netmod <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> on behalf of "Sterne, Jason (Nokia - CA/Ottawa)" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Monday, July 17, 2017 at 6:22 AM To: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: [netmod] nmda-guidelines-01: value space for config vs state Hi all, A note in Rob Wilton’s presentation today in rtgwg mentioned something about consistency in the value space for config vs state leafs. The NMDA approach results in the same leaf for both config & state in many cases (at least for the cases where the separate config & state leafs were only there to represent intended vs applied config). But aren’t there some cases where the value space for state will be different than the value space for config ? I’m thinking of the basic admin/oper state for interfaces for example where config may allow enable/disable but state may have additional values like ‘testing’. If the config & state value spaces aren’t 100% the same, are module designers recommended to create a separate state leaf ? In this particular example, the leaf you are describing would be read-only system state as opposed to applied state. If there were such a leaf that could take on a wider range of values of applied state values than the intended state, I’d expect the value space would need to be the superset. Thanks, Acee Rgds, Jason
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
