Re: [Netconf] draft-ietf-netconf-nmda-netconf review

Hi,

I still feel that the examples need to show more information. We have added to filter mechanism and also the with-origin parameter. But there is no example to show its usage. 
An example showing that query output MAY contain origins which user may not desire, for example Device having a configuration with parent belonging to intended origin and child leaf belonging to system origin and user gives negated filter to avoid intended (in such cases, both parent and child will be part of output). As mentioned by Juergen, it is intention of the draft to output the leaf which match the filter condition.

With Regards,
Rohit R Ranade

-----Original Message-----
From: Netconf [mailto:netconf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Martin Bjorklund
Sent: 16 May 2018 11:38
To: mjethanandani@gmail.com
Cc: netconf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Netconf] draft-ietf-netconf-nmda-netconf review

Hi,

Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com> wrote:
> Let me take this up in a separate thread that is not tied to this review.

Ok.

> In the meantime, can we address the pyang error.

It is not an error, but a warning.  This enum value is described in the description for the leaf, so I think the current text is fine.

/martin

> 
> > On May 15, 2018, at 1:30 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de> wrote:
> > 
> > On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 01:14:12PM +0200, Mahesh Jethanandani wrote:
> >> 
> >> 
> >>> On May 15, 2018, at 11:42 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de> wrote:
> >>> 
> >>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 10:36:16AM +0200, Mahesh Jethanandani wrote:
> >>>> 
> >>>> 2. This is a follow-up to the discussion on the mailing list. Reading through this draft, RFC7950, RFC6020, and rfc7895bis, it is not clear if a NETCONF server that wants to support both YANG 1.0 and YANG 1.1, needs to do from a schema advertisement perspective. Does it advertise the schemas as part of <hello> and as part of yang-library:1.1? Does it advertise both YANG 1.0 and 1.1 models in both the modes?
> >>>> 
> >>> 
> >>> How does this relate to NMDA?
> >> 
> >> If we agree this needs to be clarified, we can decide next where to put the clarification.
> >> 
> > 
> > Well you raised this in a thread concerning nmda-netconf. We 
> > currently have this:
> > 
> >   An NMDA-compliant NETCONF server MUST support the operational state
> >   datastore and it MUST implement at least revision 201X-XX-XX of the
> >   "ietf-yang-library" module defined in [I-D.ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis].
> > 
> > So for NMDA, implementations have to use "ietf-yang-library".
> > 
> > So what are the proposed edits that relate to NMDA?
> > 
> > /js
> > 
> > -- 
> > Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
> > Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
> > Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <https://www.jacobs-university.de/>
> 
> Mahesh Jethanandani
> mjethanandani@gmail.com
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Netconf mailing list
> Netconf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf
> 

_______________________________________________
Netconf mailing list
Netconf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf