Re: [netmod] draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6991-bis: Comment on node-instance-identifier

Per Hedeland <per@hedeland.org> Mon, 04 November 2019 14:52 UTC

Return-Path: <per@hedeland.org>
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 22952120808; Mon, 4 Nov 2019 06:52:32 -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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=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 XI_j7WlULLw2; Mon, 4 Nov 2019 06:52:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailout.easydns.com (mailout.easydns.com [64.68.202.10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2E0C21200F4; Mon, 4 Nov 2019 06:52:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailout.easydns.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68EC1A068D; Mon, 4 Nov 2019 14:52:27 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mailout.easydns.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (emo13-pco.easydns.vpn [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oKHmE8ms4d3r; Mon, 4 Nov 2019 14:52:27 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from hedeland.org (81-228-157-209-no289.tbcn.telia.com [81.228.157.209]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mailout.easydns.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 19ED5A0224; Mon, 4 Nov 2019 14:52:22 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pluto.hedeland.org (pluto.hedeland.org [10.1.1.5]) by tellus.hedeland.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id xA4EqKbO031536 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 4 Nov 2019 15:52:21 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from per@hedeland.org)
To: =?UTF-8?B?U2Now7Zud8OkbGRlciwgSsO8cmdlbg==?= <J.Schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
Cc: Robert Wilton <rwilton@cisco.com>, "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6991-bis@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6991-bis@ietf.org>
References: <9878ec54-4b3b-e83c-a60c-973478de11f4@cisco.com> <20191104103242.prnszis5olcfzcyl@anna.jacobs.jacobs-university.de> <14e342e5-cd63-898b-4b77-0537b4d3c3b4@hedeland.org> <20191104134644.za3eng4nflbfk2mi@anna.jacobs.jacobs-university.de>
From: Per Hedeland <per@hedeland.org>
Message-ID: <35905ef0-6b16-07cd-1586-204ad6749b9c@hedeland.org>
Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2019 15:52:20 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20191104134644.za3eng4nflbfk2mi@anna.jacobs.jacobs-university.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/BqJFa7iLHBT8CXeauyXjTkWDwzE>
Subject: Re: [netmod] draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6991-bis: Comment on node-instance-identifier
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: Mon, 04 Nov 2019 14:52:32 -0000

On 2019-11-04 14:46, Schönwälder, Jürgen wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> what about this wording :
> 
>       [...]
> 
>        A node-instance-identifier value is an unrestricted
>        YANG instance-identifier expression or the special
>        value '/', which refers to the entire accessible tree.
> 
>       [...]

Yes, that should be "good enough" I think. Though when reading the
text from NACM for the umpteenth time, I got hung up on the word
"unrestricted" - doesn't that mean "require-instance true"?

 From 7950:

9.13.1.  Restrictions

    An instance-identifier can be restricted with the "require-instance"
    statement (Section 9.9.3).

9.9.3.  The "require-instance" Statement

    The "require-instance" statement, which is a substatement to the
    "type" statement, MAY be present if the type is "instance-identifier"
    or "leafref".  It takes as an argument the string "true" or "false".
    If this statement is not present, it defaults to "true".

Probably not worth worrying about...

--Per