Re: [netmod] 'status' statement needed on every node
Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com> Tue, 05 September 2017 23:36 UTC
Return-Path: <andy@yumaworks.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 913B81320DC for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Sep 2017 16:36:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=yumaworks-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 C8HoGZpMo0DQ for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Sep 2017 16:36:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-it0-x229.google.com (mail-it0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::229]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C486012426E for <netmod@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Sep 2017 16:36:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-it0-x229.google.com with SMTP id k189so5921615itk.0 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Tue, 05 Sep 2017 16:36:11 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yumaworks-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=ktbHDndeKXvIaN5rG8G90g5ljEdbcgxNRb0vphZ7vps=; b=pGvi0Dvw8vujDpF2AEs1xorGRiUspKRzOwEkhNRVoL0X84gvyEg6CejgrfhOysl+s8 f2ykHKrVuhlTH3SA0dt/V8nXs6opNVZiE85tBWQTJLcBC3+YXUvIzH6SZg0cVmEQrABa izLVkZq+9I4UcKGgtppG73SJ+ftmTrOENZNt7v/S+4vMeJZdykrQALcSlaPx08t1d+/H nabnB5lYqzZ5Hp57Qe5YQQhUBC3NDAOD+jHCv/2HLovozr7OfFKfYkV9Zu8+W0yKfgnV JKTNdWKWdXAcItAOjY7gY/fKvrcTyJRX72Y3h2YUh7uYItK/HTCz+xjrhqe0ErsygpvA gOGg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=ktbHDndeKXvIaN5rG8G90g5ljEdbcgxNRb0vphZ7vps=; b=s+6o+aM5ETmtmYvpxCaUtSR411eajUziMVX625B83aJA58zpb6DMUQwewDuyf0dL+L xwj45XObMZyB6sA9f2vXouhLFbeGYnlJlOLXG194RZFH00IglHvXX4qIXwIL3QcFYE4Y ruEii3AbfIB+pTGygWuFMJEXucHed+exk5K/ZesT5gJzbt7qRSbMhmWASlQ2gj3z6YoJ lOOYHU9LS0Vgpq0OLm3iC3aU0iW2vYRIDSGPOmLyQNqlDWKZgUx6iRyrRwbCsa0PvNEX CHmjqjTHjZfIXuHcSvfhdhdINBwrx3V7g+EVAAE1+/pp4vv2fGgTcIOFI9tLfsJLewHm lCQg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHPjjUjHaE/yrF8RSRCbZ1EgAdQ0Yj2nK2Nln7HyHgGXZXtG8wA2Do5K A3xc0BXljUTY5gjWCFf0NA7pczwVs2sM
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADKCNb5Pr4eTsdhl3E9i0crIbu3ZljWRX08K6FnuVu/FJW06unl7PIUCfPmGyjgRl5c1/iC6nvDpS+z+9FwFMDddQL0=
X-Received: by 10.36.40.138 with SMTP id h132mr1033129ith.26.1504654571076; Tue, 05 Sep 2017 16:36:11 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.36.6.206 with HTTP; Tue, 5 Sep 2017 16:36:10 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <B1BB11D4-9051-458E-ACCE-991ADEA4884A@juniper.net>
References: <13F2175A-C913-4173-BE2A-50C668C08FF6@juniper.net> <20170905181444.tdfliar5zk4hixsd@elstar.local> <CABCOCHS59CLdCHxZHvJr7LSRXH4m1iVpf6GctchYCZjVrLuvGw@mail.gmail.com> <20170905190151.fizr5dljufbyuyty@elstar.local> <B1BB11D4-9051-458E-ACCE-991ADEA4884A@juniper.net>
From: Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2017 16:36:10 -0700
Message-ID: <CABCOCHTycfsSi11Jfsrs=mFstzYg3257JtFGqgKGr-NpR8rxgQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net>
Cc: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>, "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a113f62ec38248b055879b15a"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/P-tNBzKs3YLWH-YtGkoehy9wG6M>
Subject: Re: [netmod] 'status' statement needed on every node
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 05 Sep 2017 23:36:13 -0000
On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net> wrote: > > > > >> I still don't know what it means to define hierarchical data and say the > >> parent is deprecated but not the descendant nodes. > > > > It is odd but can happen anyway. A current augmentation of something > > that got deprecated likely stays current. I would hope that tools warn > > if they see this but that's it. > > This example seems to provide support for saying status should be > inherited. But, to be clear, you agree that if a parent is deprecated, > than its decedents should be deprecated as well, right? > > > right -- the RFC says this has to be done manually. A missing status-stmt means status=current. > > >> This is rather non-intuitive, as is the idea that all descendant > >> nodes need to be manually edited (status is not inherited). > > > > Not a big deal. The benefit is that a reader like me knows clear that > > the definition I am look at is deprecated, no need to search backwards > > to find out. > > tree diagrams do this too, though I like Martin's approach of removing > the deprecated -state trees from the tree diagram altogether. > > > > >> It also means the objects expanded from groupings cannot ever be > >> changed (clearly a bug in YANG). > > > > Yes, bug in YANG. > > Is this the same issue I raised? > > import ietf-foo { > prefix f; > } > > container bar { > uses f:foo; > } > > container baz { > status deprecated; > uses f:foo; <-- oops, descendants not deprecated! > } (not a problem if status inherited) > > According to my interpretation of 7.21.2, this is a MUST NOT: If a definition is "current", it MUST NOT reference a "deprecated" or "obsolete" definition within the same module. If a definition is "deprecated", it MUST NOT reference an "obsolete" definition within the same module. For example, the following is illegal: typedef my-type { status deprecated; type int32; } leaf my-leaf { status current; type my-type; // illegal, since my-type is deprecated } The term "reference" is not really defined above. It should also clearly apply to "uses" (e.g., your example) and leafref path-stmt. leaf foo { type string; status deprecated; } leaf bar { type leafref { path /foo; } } If it apples to path-stmt, then why not all XPath? Why doesn't "reference" include descendant nodes? The text in 7950 is too strict and can cause a massive ripple-effect when any status-stmt is changed. At the same time it is too vague to be useful to implementors. > K. > > > > > Andy
- [netmod] 'status' statement needed on every node Kent Watsen
- Re: [netmod] 'status' statement needed on every n… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] 'status' statement needed on every n… Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] 'status' statement needed on every n… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] 'status' statement needed on every n… Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] 'status' statement needed on every n… Kent Watsen
- Re: [netmod] 'status' statement needed on every n… Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] 'status' statement needed on every n… heasley
- Re: [netmod] 'status' statement needed on every n… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] 'status' statement needed on every n… Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [netmod] 'status' statement needed on every n… Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [netmod] 'status' statement needed on every n… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] 'status' statement needed on every n… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] 'status' statement needed on every n… Radek Krejčí
- Re: [netmod] 'status' statement needed on every n… Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [netmod] 'status' statement needed on every n… Robert Wilton
- Re: [netmod] 'status' statement needed on every n… Ladislav Lhotka
- Re: [netmod] 'status' statement needed on every n… Radek Krejčí
- Re: [netmod] 'status' statement needed on every n… Ladislav Lhotka
- Re: [netmod] 'status' statement needed on every n… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] 'status' statement needed on every n… Robert Wilton
- Re: [netmod] 'status' statement needed on every n… Andy Bierman