Hi Deepak, > <snip> > Issues #1 and #2 speak to this: > > https://github.com/netmod-wg/template-reqs/issues/1 let’s a template-consumer > consume a *list* of templates. > > https://github.com/netmod-wg/template-reqs/issues/2 > <https://github.com/netmod-wg/template-reqs/issues/1> let’s a template be a > template-consumer too. > > Combined, these provide robust support. Is it accurate to say that you > support these two requirements? > >> Yes, indeed, I support this. For the second requirement, I don’t know if > >> we are making it more complex, but I am not against it.
Someone else had this comment, about hierarchal templates being maybe too complex. I wonder if the concern is complexity for the client vs complexity for the server…? > If a template contains configuration data/data nodes of specific data > models(instead of under anydata), the validation becomes relevant at > definition. > This is true statement (modulo s/relevant /possible). The question is if the > tradeoff is worth it? > >> I would still say, it is worth, because, the feedback loop can be > >> immediate. Ie: if it is validated at the time of defining, we know > >> immediately if the template would be usable/unusable when it is being > >> referred. Ie: A template can just be defined and not used immediately, in > >> that case we could come to know about potential wrong configurations, only > >> when it is being referred. But I do agree, we are then talking about > >> model-specific templates. Maybe the rough example(not a validated xml or > >> schema tree😊) below could provide more details. This requirement is captured here: https://github.com/netmod-wg/template-reqs/issues/4. I personally don’t support this requirement, if it entails having YANG for each template. Kent // contributor
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
