[resending as I've had no reply yet]
Hi,
In a YANG deviation file, any node being deviated requires an explicit prefix
on all elements in the node's path. However, if a deviation statement includes
a new must statement, does that must statement require explicit prefixes on any
node name it
Hi,
In a YANG deviation file, any node being deviated requires an explicit prefix
on all elements in the node's path. However, if a deviation statement includes
a new must statement, does that must statement require explicit prefixes on any
node name it includes, or can an implicit namespace
Apologies if this has already been suggested and deemed unworkable, but if you
have access to all previous version labels for a branch then you can add 'M'
only to the versions that are NBC with the previous version, and subsequent
versions could drop the M until the next NBC change, ie:
1.0.0
Thanks for confirming.
William
On Tue, 2020-01-07 at 12:42 +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
Hi,
"Ivory, William"
mailto:william.iv...@intl.att.com>> wrote:
Hi,
I've got a must statement that causes a compilation error on a Cisco NCS device
(admittedly ancient (NCS version 3
Hi Martin,
Thanks - yes, that makes sense.
William
On Thu, 2019-12-19 at 12:20 +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
Hi,
"Ivory, William"
mailto:william.iv...@intl.att.com>> wrote:
Hi,
I've got a question about the 'fraction-digit' statement which I'm
hoping someone can
Hi,
I've got a question about the 'fraction-digit' statement which I'm hoping
someone can clarify. I know it is used to specify the range of valid values, as
shown (in part) in the table below:
++---+--+
| fraction-digit | min
On 07/08/18 23:01, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote:
Is it possible to indicate that choice statement must be specified in a YANG
1.1 “must” clause w/o specifying every case? Similarly, it is there a way
specify that a container cannot be empty in “must” clause?
Thanks,
Acee
[to list this time ...]
On 07/08/18 18:37, Sterne, Jason (Nokia - CA/Ottawa) wrote:
Hi all,
When comparing the value of a boolean leaf in a 'when' statement (or a 'must'
statement), is an equality comparison to 'true' or 'false' the same as a check
against true() or false() ?
For example:
leaf a {
type boolean;
On 07/08/18 23:01, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote:
Is it possible to indicate that choice statement must be specified in a YANG
1.1 “must” clause w/o specifying every case? Similarly, it is there a way
specify that a container cannot be empty in “must” clause?
Thanks,
Acee
For the second, just check
[mailto:rwil...@cisco.com]
Sent: 15 December 2017 17:42
To: Ivory, William <william.iv...@intl.att.com>; 'netmod@ietf.org'
<netmod@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [netmod] Query about augmenting 'config false' YANG
Looks valid to me.
Thanks,
Rob
On 15/12/2017 14:02, Ivory, William wrote:
Hi,
Hi,
I'm running into a problem where my YANG is being rejected by a NETCONF client
that claims it can't find the node being augmented. The YANG snippet below
shows the problem which relates specifically to augmenting a node that is
'config false'. AFAICT from reading RFC 6020, this is valid
Hi,
I've asked about evaluating must statements on unconfigured non-presence
containers here before, but realise I never got a definitive answer on whether
the clarification in the YANG 1.1 issues list actually applies to YANG 1.0, or
only YANG 1.1:
YANG 1.0 XPATH context:
Yes, we'll consider that.
Thanks,
William
-Original Message-
From: Robert Wilton [mailto:rwil...@cisco.com]
Sent: 23 August 2017 11:26
To: Ivory, William <william.iv...@intl.att.com>; 'Juergen Schoenwaelder'
<j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de>
Cc: 'Alex Campbell'
-Original Message-
From: Robert Wilton [mailto:rwil...@cisco.com]
Sent: 23 August 2017 10:46
To: Ivory, William <william.iv...@intl.att.com>; 'Juergen Schoenwaelder'
<j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de>
Cc: 'Alex Campbell' <alex.campb...@aviatnet.com>; 'netmod@ietf.org'
that's probably not a priority when determining
feature sets for future versions (-:
William
-Original Message-
From: t.petch [mailto:ie...@btconnect.com]
Sent: 23 August 2017 10:46
To: Acee Lindem (acee) <a...@cisco.com>; Ivory, William
<william.iv...@intl.att.com>; n
-Original Message-
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de]
Sent: 23 August 2017 08:25
To: Ivory, William <william.iv...@intl.att.com>
Cc: 'Alex Campbell' <alex.campb...@aviatnet.com>; 'Robert Wilton'
<rwil...@cisco.com>; 'netmod@ietf.org
: Alex Campbell [mailto:alex.campb...@aviatnet.com]
Sent: 22 August 2017 23:28
To: Ivory, William <william.iv...@intl.att.com>; 'Robert Wilton'
<rwil...@cisco.com>; 'netmod@ietf.org' <netmod@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [netmod] Query about augmenting module from submodule in YANG 1.0
Hi Rob,
That would make it very hard to update existing 1.x YANG models to use new
features in YANG 2.x if they used submodules. Maybe that's something that no
one would ever consider doing anyway, or maybe YANG 1.1 already has similar
differences to 1.0? I had (perhaps naively) assumed that
...@transpacket.com]
Sent: 07 August 2017 20:31
To: Ivory, William <william.iv...@intl.att.com>
Cc: 'netmod@ietf.org' <netmod@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [netmod] Query about augmenting module from submodule in YANG 1.0
Hello,
IMO "submodule"s are a striking example of redundant complexity
Hi Jan,
Thanks – we’ll look at trying to put everything into submodules in this case.
Regards,
William
From: Jan Lindblad [mailto:j...@tail-f.com]
Sent: 07 August 2017 14:28
To: Ivory, William <wi2...@intl.att.com>
Cc: netmod@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netmod] Query about augmenting modul
Hi,
We're trying to solve a modularity problem with a YANG module by splitting it
into submodules and augmenting the parent module from each submodule. However,
despite the wording below in YANG 1.0 section 7.15, we've found a couple of
threads online with comments suggesting it's only
21 matches
Mail list logo
