Carsten Bormann <c...@tzi.org> wrote:
> On 2022-11-24, at 17:02, Jan Lindblad (jlindbla)
> <jlindbla=40cisco....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>>
>> If any of this causes problems with SID generation, I'm afraid that's
>> not my territory. :-)
> I think it would be good if there were sx:structure support in PYANG
> that we can use. (Which still may not be your territory…)
I see two possibilities:
a) there is a genuine bug in the sid module for pyang.
b) there is some missing/wrong YANG, and if I just tweaked something, it
would work.
I'd really like to eliminate (b) before I go on a bug hunt.
There are some additional concerns.
1. do all the modules that inherit from module-A use module-A's SID file and
allocation space?
Or, do they need their own SID allocation for extensions that they do,
with the understanding that they may also use any of module-A's values?
In which case, an implementation actually needs access to multiple SID
definition files.
2. a module SID number is allocated as the outer wrapper.
I think that module B,C,D, etc. should all use their number for the outer
wrapper.
3. in some cases not illustrated in this test, we have, under "augment",
refined the rules for some leaves. It's not clear to me that we can do this
using sx:structure, and I think that augment-structure has the same failings
as "augment" had.
I would very much like to have a wider discussion of this.
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
