[netmod] Re: Template draft update

[Reshad Rahman <[e-mail]>]

 Hi all,
Yes my request is to be able get unexpanded nodes. What is mentioned below, and in the current revision iirc, works fine for me.
I just updated #15 with the following:Operators need a way to get the unexpanded config. If it's obtained via <running>, good with me. The most common use case is doing a diff from what's on the device to what was last pushed by the controller. And if we can only get expanded config, NSO's sync-fromcommand would lead to expanded config being put in CDB.

Regards,Reshad.
    On Tuesday, November 11, 2025 at 04:16:31 PM EST, Shiya Ashraf (Nokia) <shiya.ashraf=[e-mail]> wrote:  
 
 Hi,
Unexpanded template data nodes are "ONLY" in <running>.Data nodes expanded from templates are in <intended> or <operational>
I think this is what is requested by Reshad in his email and I agree on this. 
Unexpanded template data nodes shouldn't be part of the <intended>, unnecessary duplication (also the view of RFC8342).
Thanks,Shiya
From: Kent Watsen <[e-mail]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2025 10:03 PM
To: Deepak Rajaram (Nokia) <[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
Subject: [netmod] Re: Template draft update 

|   | CAUTION: This is an external email. Please be very careful when clicking links or opening attachments. See the URL nok.it/ext for additional information. |


 
Please note that the Show of Hands polls for issue #15 and issue #17 show that most folks disagreed with returning the unexpanded templates in <intended> or <operational>.
Sorry if I caused any confusion.  To be clear, I agree with the poll-results (i.e., do not return unexpended templates from <intended> or <operational>.
Kent


On Nov 11, 2025, at 9:05 AM, Deepak Rajaram (Nokia) <[e-mail]> wrote:

Thanks Reshad, Kent,

 

Point noted, we will discuss and update.

 

This was discussed in the interim as well. As such, I am also not against in having the unexpanded template config as part of the intended, considering they both(running and intended) are conventional DS that have the same schema.

 

Regards,
Deepak

 

From: Reshad Rahman <reshad=[e-mail]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2025 4:28 AM
To: Kent Watsen <[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail]; Deepak Rajaram (Nokia) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [netmod] Template draft update

 

| 
 
 | 
CAUTION: This is an external email. Please be very careful when clicking links or opening attachments. See the URL nok.it/ext for additional information.
 |


 

Thanks Kent. I'd suggest putting that in an Operational Considerations section...

 

Regards,

Reshad.

 

On Monday, November 10, 2025 at 01:20:38 PM EST, Kent Watsen <[e-mail]> wrote:

 

 

I like Reshad's idea.

 

Kent // contributor

 






On Nov 7, 2025, at 2:02 PM, Reshad Rahman <reshad=[e-mail]> wrote:

 

Hi,

 

One comment/question I had @ IETF123 was the ability to get the non-expanded config (e.g. to check that the config on the device is what was pushed). I just took a look at the latest revision and it seems simple to do so: get-data on <running> will return non-expanded config whereas on get-data <intended> will return expanded config. Worth mentioning in the document?

 

Regards,

Reshad.

 

On Friday, November 7, 2025 at 12:33:48 AM EST, Deepak Rajaram (Nokia) <deepak.rajaram=[e-mail]> wrote:

 

 

Hello All,

 

Just a quick update — work on the draft-YANG Configuration Templates is continuing. We’re making steady progress considering the feedback from IETF-123-Madrid, and will share the next revision once key sections including the validation aspects are finalized. The requirements(from interim) traceability is also being worked upon.

 

Regards,

Deepak(On behalf of the authors)

 

_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list -- [e-mail]
To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]

_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list -- [e-mail]
To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]


 


_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list -- [e-mail]
To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]