Re: [netconf] YANG Library 1.1: a deviation module may exist without a module entry?

[Ladislav Lhotka <[e-mail]>]

On 13. 05. 21 17:39, Sterne, Jason (Nokia - CA/Ottawa) wrote:
> The concept of "deviation module" is a bit odd IMO in RFC8525.
> 
> Deviation statements can sit in any module and can be mixed in a module that declares other schema nodes (containers, lists, etc).
> 
> Maybe it is a nice idea for authors to gather deviations into modules that contain nothing but deviation statements, but that would just be a convention of how to organize your modules. Nothing in the specs really requires that.

Right, I never really understood why the "deviation" leaf-list was
needed in the first place, given that it is completely redundant. It
just creates ambiguous situations:

https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/BPVPQf-I9p-1C1K5NLmSsk0K_D8/

Lada

> 
> Jason
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: netconf <[e-mail]> On Behalf Of Jernej Tuljak
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2021 7:44 AM
>> To: Netconf <[e-mail]>
>> Subject: Re: [netconf] YANG Library 1.1: a deviation module may exist
>> without a module entry?
>>
>> Somehow it slipped my mind that require-instance defaults to true in
>> YANG 1.1. Everything checks out.
>>
>> A server implementation that announces a deviation module in the
>> "/yang-library/module-set/module/deviation" leaf-list, but lacks a
>> corresponding entry in "/yang-library/module-set/module" list is
>> non-RFC8525 compliant.
>>
>> Jernej
>>
>> On 12/05/2021 11:18, Jernej Tuljak wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> is there a particular reason for the deviation leaf-list in
>>> ietf-yang-library@2019-01-04 not having require-instance true for its
>>> leafref path, therefore allowing servers to report "incomplete" module
>>> sets/schemas to the client?
>>>
>>>      grouping module-implementation-parameters {
>>>        description
>>>          "Parameters for describing the implementation of a module.";
>>>        leaf-list feature {
>>>          type yang:yang-identifier;
>>>          description
>>>            "List of all YANG feature names from this module that are
>>>             supported by the server, regardless whether they are defined
>>>             in the module or any included submodule.";
>>>        }
>>>        leaf-list deviation {
>>>          type leafref {
>>>            path "../../module/name";
>>>          }
>>>
>>>          description
>>>            "List of all YANG deviation modules used by this server to
>>>             modify the conformance of the module associated with this
>>>             entry.  Note that the same module can be used for deviations
>>>             for multiple modules, so the same entry MAY appear within
>>>             multiple 'module' entries.
>>>
>>>             This reference MUST NOT (directly or indirectly)
>>>             refer to the module being deviated.
>>>
>>>             Robust clients may want to make sure that they handle a
>>>             situation where a module deviates itself (directly or
>>>             indirectly) gracefully.";
>>>        }
>>>      }
>>>
>>> Why are deviation modules allowed to exist without a module entry
>>> within YANG Library instances? Why would a server choose to withhold
>>> namespace information for a deviation module?
>>>
>>> Jernej
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> netconf mailing list
>>> [e-mail]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> netconf mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf
> _______________________________________________
> netconf mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf
> 

-- 
Ladislav Lhotka
Head, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67