Subject: [netmod] yang-02, 7.5.2

From: Andy Bierman <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2008 16:01:33 -0800

Hi,

Are all these discussions about must-stmt inside rpc or
notification academic?

 From 7.5.2, para 4:

    The "must" statement is ignored if the data does not represent
    configuration.

Para 7:

    If the node with the must statement represents configuration data,
    any node referenced in the XPath expression MUST also represent
    configuration.

These statements seem to conflict.
It's fine with me if we leave must-stmt processing out
of RPC and notification completely.  It will make the
document easier to read and write (and get done).

BTW, para 7 is not quite complete -- 'any node referenced'
could be via 1 of the wildcard mechanisms, and not just
an explicit path statement like the examples we often use.
Each path statement result is a node-set, not just 1 node.
Ditto for each path step.

So we need a sentence that says that non-config nodes
matched by [fill in the wildcard mechanisms], instead
of by direct reference, are ignored during must-stmt
validation and evaluation.

Or are wildcard matches considered an error also?

Andy

_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod