Hi,
Consider a template that defines some interface data nodes using ietf
interfaces yang model. Leaf node “type” is a mandatory data node according to
RFC 8343.
+--rw interfaces
+--rw interface* [name]
+--rw name string
+--rw description? string
+--rw type identityref
So even if you have defined the “type” of the interface in the templates, you
will be forced to set this at the reference point as well. Isn’t it?
Thanks,
Shiya
From: Andy Bierman <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2024 6:36 PM
To: Kent Watsen <[email protected]>
Cc: Shiya Ashraf (Nokia) <[email protected]>; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [netmod] Mandatory/default statements and templates (was: Yang
Template Proposals)
CAUTION: This is an external email. Please be very careful when clicking links
or opening attachments. See the URL nok.it/ext for additional information.
On Wed, Nov 13, 2024 at 8:35 AM Kent Watsen
<[email protected]<mailto:kent%[email protected]>> wrote:
Hi Shiya,
On Nov 13, 2024, at 10:09 AM, Shiya Ashraf (Nokia)
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
wrote:
Hi Kent,
Sorry but I miss the point you made with the below statement:
“As a contributor, I feel that the concern is unwarranted. My belief/hope is
that templates are not themselves validated when defined, but rather only the
fully expanded/flattened results of templates are validated.“
Shiya>> For mandatories, the problem that was highlighted was more about
following the DRY approach for templates. For instance, in the below example
copied from #3, slide 6, assume if the ‘mtu’ was defined as a mandatory data
node with in a non-presence container, you will be forced to add it anyway for
each interface in the below example and thus loosing the advantage of
templating for these special data nodes. Isn’t it?
I don’t understand your comment, but I will state my worldview (as a
contributor) which is:
- any data model can be templatized (including already published YANG modules)
- these data models may contain `mandatory` and `default` statements
- templates are NOT themselves ever validated
- only the post-expanded/flattened result is validated (e.g., in <intended>)
Agreed.
This is easily accomplished by using an 'anydata' wrapper for the template
content.
<template>
<name>template1</name>
<target>/ietf-interfaces:interfaces/interface</target>
<data>
<interface>
....
</interface>
<data>
</template>
This solution has been in deployment for over 7 years.
https://github.com/YumaWorks/yumapro-yang/blob/main/yumaworks/yumaworks-templates.yang
IMO the WG should try to support more than the basics (like ranges and
conditional logic).
FWIW, I was referring to Slide 8 of Template Idea #1.
K.
Andy
<interfaces>
<interface yt:apply-templates=“set_physical_mtu”>
<name>GigabitEthernet0/0/0/0</name>
</interface>
<interface>
<name>GigabitEthernet0/0/0/1</name>
</interface>
</interfaces>
Thanks,
Shiya
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list -- [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
To unsubscribe send an email to
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
