IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [netmod] Query about must statement syntax

"Ivory, William" <william.ivory@intl.att.com> Tue, 07 January 2020 11:44 UTC

Return-Path: <william.ivory@intl.att.com>
X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F250120072 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Jan 2020 03:44:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Cu2y4RvKdqUR for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Jan 2020 03:44:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.157.136]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C54C5120026 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Tue, 7 Jan 2020 03:44:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0049459.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0049459.ppops.net-00191d01. (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 007BZTbR006675; Tue, 7 Jan 2020 06:44:30 -0500
Received: from alpi155.enaf.aldc.att.com (sbcsmtp7.sbc.com [144.160.229.24]) by m0049459.ppops.net-00191d01. with ESMTP id 2xc9wf732x-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 07 Jan 2020 06:44:30 -0500
Received: from enaf.aldc.att.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alpi155.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id 007BiTmV027316; Tue, 7 Jan 2020 06:44:30 -0500
Received: from zlp27125.vci.att.com (zlp27125.vci.att.com [135.66.87.52]) by alpi155.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id 007BiQUB027285 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 7 Jan 2020 06:44:26 -0500
Received: from zlp27125.vci.att.com (zlp27125.vci.att.com [127.0.0.1]) by zlp27125.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTP id 20A7416A3E6; Tue, 7 Jan 2020 11:44:26 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from gbcdcmbx13.intl.att.com (unknown [135.76.180.49]) by zlp27125.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTPS id CAE2316A3E5; Tue, 7 Jan 2020 11:44:25 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from gbcdcmbx15.intl.att.com (135.76.180.51) by gbcdcmbx13.intl.att.com (135.76.180.49) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.1.1847.3; Tue, 7 Jan 2020 11:44:23 +0000
Received: from gbcdcmbx15.intl.att.com ([fe80::f44d:965d:2bf3:fe97]) by gbcdcmbx15.intl.att.com ([fe80::f44d:965d:2bf3:fe97%5]) with mapi id 15.01.1847.003; Tue, 7 Jan 2020 11:44:23 +0000
From: "Ivory, William" <william.ivory@intl.att.com>
To: "mbj@tail-f.com" <mbj@tail-f.com>
CC: "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [netmod] Query about must statement syntax
Thread-Index: AQHVxUWU63FnkN7uP0mXcxnkdDcxHqffFJEAgAAAfwA=
Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2020 11:44:23 +0000
Message-ID: <e0e233844f1abb45c63811bb9d068ca6f44146b0.camel@intl.att.com>
References: <5dd9acc04237a6160c93da52bcbe1330834616c7.camel@intl.att.com> <20200107.124236.2150818227881781740.mbj@tail-f.com>
In-Reply-To: <20200107.124236.2150818227881781740.mbj@tail-f.com>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-mailer: Evolution 3.28.5-0ubuntu0.18.04.1
x-originating-ip: [135.76.168.250]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_e0e233844f1abb45c63811bb9d068ca6f44146b0camelintlattcom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.95,18.0.572 definitions=2020-01-07_03:2020-01-06,2020-01-07 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 phishscore=0 impostorscore=0 spamscore=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 bulkscore=0 clxscore=1015 adultscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=512 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-1910280000 definitions=main-2001070095
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/4PfT5ukl-bgahK3ck3SMpwbAhvY>
Subject: Re: [netmod] Query about must statement syntax
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETMOD WG list <netmod.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netmod/>
List-Post: <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2020 11:44:34 -0000

Thanks for confirming.

William

On Tue, 2020-01-07 at 12:42 +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote:

Hi,


"Ivory, William" <william.ivory@intl.att.com<mailto:william.ivory@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 3.4.4), but can't update it), as follows:


must "(../../packets * current()) <= (../../interval * 1000)";


Error is 'error: XPath syntax error: 40: unknown operator current'


However, our internal XPATH compiler thinks this is valid, and if I change the order in the must statement to the following, the NCS is happy:


must "(current() * ../../packets) <= (../../interval * 1000)";


Can anyone confirm if there is a genuine error in the original must

statement, or is it valid XPATH?


The XPath expression is legal.



/martin

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email