Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 (6031)

[Kent Watsen <[e-mail]>]

> On Apr 6, 2020, at 3:42 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> The definition I found in RFC 8639 is this:
> 
>        leaf stream {
>          type stream-ref {
>            require-instance false;
>          }
>          mandatory true;
>          description
>            "Indicates the event stream to be considered for
>             this subscription.";
>        }
> 
> This could be changed to:
> 
>        leaf stream {
>          type leafref {
> 	    path "/sn:streams/sn:stream/sn:name";
>            require-instance false;
>          }
>          mandatory true;
>          description
>            "Indicates the event stream to be considered for
>             this subscription.";
>        }
> 

I can confirm that `yanglint` validates the module cleanly after this change.



> On Apr 6, 2020, at 7:38 AM, Martin Björklund <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> I think the correct fix is to change the text so that
> "require-instance" is not classified as a restriction and keep the
> default.  

Agreed.


> Also, I think that it would be easiest (for backwards
> compatibility w/ existing models) to allow "require-inetance" to be
> changed in derived types.
> 
> However, this cannot imo be done in an errata.

While I appreciate Radek and Michal’s perspective, I also think that is would be best for the community for `yanglint` to support this, as they are published modules doing it.

As an aside, I feel that all modules should be tested against all available validation tools during the publication process, but to find issues in the modules and well as possibly improve the tools.

Sadly, I only have `yanglint` and `yangson` available to me.  I just checked for the “yang validator” project, but both www.yangvalidator.com <http://www.yangvalidator.com/> and https://www.yangcatalog.org/yangvalidator <https://www.yangcatalog.org/yangvalidator> seem to be down.


Kent // contributor