Hi, Unexpanded template data nodes are "ONLY" in <running>. Data nodes expanded from templates are in <intended> or <operational>
I think this is what is requested by Reshad in his email and I agree on this. Unexpanded template data nodes shouldn't be part of the <intended>, unnecessary duplication (also the view of RFC8342). Thanks, Shiya ________________________________ From: Kent Watsen <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2025 10:03 PM To: Deepak Rajaram (Nokia) <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]> Subject: [netmod] Re: Template draft update 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. Please note that the Show of Hands polls for issue #15<https://github.com/netmod-wg/template-reqs/issues/15> and issue #17<https://github.com/netmod-wg/template-reqs/issues/17> show that most folks disagreed with returning the unexpanded templates in <intended> or <operational>. Sorry if I caused any confusion. To be clear, I agree with the poll-results (i.e., do not return unexpended templates from <intended> or <operational>. Kent On Nov 11, 2025, at 9:05 AM, Deepak Rajaram (Nokia) <[email protected]> wrote: Thanks Reshad, Kent, Point noted, we will discuss and update. This was discussed in the interim as well. As such, I am also not against in having the unexpanded template config as part of the intended, considering they both(running and intended) are conventional DS that have the same schema. Regards, Deepak From: Reshad Rahman <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2025 4:28 AM To: Kent Watsen <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected]; Deepak Rajaram (Nokia) <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [netmod] Template draft update 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. Thanks Kent. I'd suggest putting that in an Operational Considerations section... Regards, Reshad. On Monday, November 10, 2025 at 01:20:38 PM EST, Kent Watsen <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: I like Reshad's idea. Kent // contributor On Nov 7, 2025, at 2:02 PM, Reshad Rahman <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Hi, One comment/question I had @ IETF123 was the ability to get the non-expanded config (e.g. to check that the config on the device is what was pushed). I just took a look at the latest revision and it seems simple to do so: get-data on <running> will return non-expanded config whereas on get-data <intended> will return expanded config. Worth mentioning in the document? Regards, Reshad. On Friday, November 7, 2025 at 12:33:48 AM EST, Deepak Rajaram (Nokia) <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Hello All, Just a quick update — work on the draft- YANG Configuration Templates<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-tt-netmod-yang-config-templates-00.html> is continuing. We’re making steady progress considering the feedback from IETF-123-Madrid, and will share the next revision once key sections including the validation aspects are finalized. The requirements(from interim) traceability is also being worked upon. Regards, Deepak(On behalf of the authors) _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list -- [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> _______________________________________________ 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]
