Re: [netmod] datastore-specific constraints

Hi,

Should it be ignored or rejected?

Also not keen in foo-operational, since it’s in contradiction to NMDA’s goals.

Regards,
Reshad.

From: netmod <netmod-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Jan Lindblad <janl@tail-f.com>
Date: Wednesday, December 12, 2018 at 9:53 AM
To: Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz>
Cc: "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [netmod] datastore-specific constraints

Lada,

Maybe you could just skip the when and explain the behavior in the description? E.g.

leaf foo {
 ...
 description "Foo controls bla, bla.
  Any configured value will be ignored when auto-foo is true.";
}

Best Regards,
/jan

On 12 Dec 2018, at 15:33, Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz<mailto:lhotka@nic.cz>> wrote:

Hi,

in some cases, constraints expressed with "when" or "must" may only be
intended for configuration datastores. A typical example is an
auto-negotiable parameter:

leaf auto-foo {
 type boolean;
 default true;
 description "If true, parameter 'foo' will be auto-negotiated.";
}
leaf foo {
 when "../auto-foo = 'false'";
 ...
}

This means that if auto-foo is true, it is impossible to configure the
foo parameter. However, even with auto-foo = true, it is desirable to
see the auto-negotiated value in <operational>, so, ideally, the "when"
constraint should not apply in <operational>.

How can this logic be modelled under NMDA? Is an extra leaf
"foo-operational" needed?

Thanks, Lada

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

_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org<mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod