> On Jul 28, 2017, at 11:13 AM, Phil Shafer <[email protected]> wrote: > > Mahesh Jethanandani writes: >> What happens if I have a 'must' statement that is written for >> validating configuration? Will it be enforced on operational datastore? > > The last paragraph of 4.7 of the NMDA draft talks about constraints > in operational: > > As a result of remnant configuration, the semantic constraints > defined in the data model cannot be relied upon for <operational>, > since the system may have remnant configuration whose constraints > were valid with the previous configuration and that are not valid > with the current configuration. Since constraints on "config false" > nodes may refer to "config true" nodes, remnant configuration may > force the violation of those constraints. The constraints that may > not hold include "when", "must", "min-elements", and "max-elements”.
Should this be a ‘may not’ or a ‘MUST NOT’? How does one decide whether constraints will apply or not? > Note that syntactic constraints cannot be violated, including > hierarchical organization, identifiers, and type-based constraints. > > So constraints like value space (since the are type-based) cannot > be violated. > > IMHO there are few cases where the value spaces differ and those > must be modeled with dual leafs. This is unfortunate, but is better > than forcing dual leafs on all situations. As mentioned in the > future we can make a YANG extension statement to tie the two leafs > together. > > Thanks, > Phil Mahesh Jethanandani [email protected] _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
