Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6110 (3362)
Jernej Tuljak <jernej.tuljak@mg-soft.si> Wed, 26 September 2012 07:51 UTC
Return-Path: <jernej.tuljak@mg-soft.si>
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 C17D721F87CB for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Sep 2012 00:51:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.449
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vY+A90jaHJTJ for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Sep 2012 00:51:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gate.mg-soft.si (gate.mg-soft.si [212.30.73.66]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D940921F87C5 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 Sep 2012 00:51:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.0.222] (tp-x61t.mg-soft.si [10.0.0.222]) by gate.mg-soft.si (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q8Q7pfp5023127 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 Sep 2012 09:51:41 +0200
Message-ID: <5062B40C.109@mg-soft.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 09:51:40 +0200
From: Jernej Tuljak <jernej.tuljak@mg-soft.si>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20110929 Thunderbird/7.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: netmod@ietf.org
References: <20120921154850.6A92C72E038@rfc-editor.org> <m2vcf2h061.fsf@ladislav.lhotka.nb1.wifi0.office.nic.cz>
In-Reply-To: <m2vcf2h061.fsf@ladislav.lhotka.nb1.wifi0.office.nic.cz>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6110 (3362)
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 07:51:43 -0000
Dne 25.9.2012 12:22, piše Ladislav Lhotka: > Hi, > > this bug is now fixed in pyang. I only used a different name ("tag") for the attribute of the<nma:unique> element, in order to follow the YIN convention. So the annotation looks e.g. like this: > > <nma:unique tag="t:a/t:b t:c"/> > > Please try it out. Didn't test the transformation, but since changes to it are semantically equivalent to what I did to fix this and it works for us, I can assume it works for you. Our hybrid schema were exactly the same, except for attribute naming. Jernej > Thanks, Lada > > RFC Errata System<rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> writes: > >> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6110, >> "Mapping YANG to Document Schema Definition Languages and Validating NETCONF Content". >> >> -------------------------------------- >> You may review the report below and at: >> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=6110&eid=3362 >> >> -------------------------------------- >> Type: Technical >> Reported by: Jernej Tuljak<jernej.tuljak@mg-soft.com> >> >> Section: 10.55. >> >> Original Text >> ------------- >> The 'unique' Statement >> >> This statement is mapped to the @nma:unique attribute. ARGUMENT MUST >> be translated so that every node identifier in each of its components >> is prefixed with the namespace prefix of the local module, unless the >> prefix is already present. The result of this translation then >> becomes the value of the @nma:unique attribute. >> >> For example, assuming that the local module prefix is "ex", >> >> unique "foo ex:bar/baz" >> >> is mapped to the following attribute/value pair: >> >> nma:unique="ex:foo ex:bar/ex:baz" >> >> Corrected Text >> -------------- >> The 'unique' Statement >> >> This statement is mapped to the<nma:unique> element. It has one >> mandatory attribute @key (with no namespace). ARGUMENT MUST >> be translated so that every node identifier in each of its components >> is prefixed with the namespace prefix of the local module, unless the >> prefix is already present. The result of this translation then >> becomes the value of the @key attribute. >> >> For example, assuming that the local module prefix is "ex", >> >> unique "foo ex:bar/baz" >> >> is mapped to the following element: >> >> <nma:unique key="ex:foo ex:bar/ex:baz" /> >> >> Notes >> ----- >> A list's unique-stmt has a cardinality of 0..1. Therefore it cannot be mapped into a single @nma:unique attribute. It should be mapped into an element instead, much like the must-stmt. Additional changes may be required throughout the document. >> >> Instructions: >> ------------- >> This errata is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please >> use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or >> rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG) >> can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. >> >> -------------------------------------- >> RFC6110 (draft-ietf-netmod-dsdl-map-10) >> -------------------------------------- >> Title : Mapping YANG to Document Schema Definition Languages and Validating NETCONF Content >> Publication Date : February 2011 >> Author(s) : L. Lhotka, Ed. >> Category : PROPOSED STANDARD >> Source : NETCONF Data Modeling Language >> Area : Operations and Management >> Stream : IETF >> Verifying Party : IESG
- [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6110 (336… RFC Errata System
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6110 … Jernej Tuljak
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6110 … Ladislav Lhotka
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6110 … Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6110 … Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6110 … Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6110 … Ladislav Lhotka
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6110 … Benoit Claise
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6110 … Ladislav Lhotka
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6110 … Jernej Tuljak
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6110 … Ladislav Lhotka
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6110 … Jernej Tuljak
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6110 … Ladislav Lhotka
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6110 … Jernej Tuljak
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6110 … Ladislav Lhotka
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6110 … Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6110 … Benoit Claise
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6110 … Ladislav Lhotka
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6110 … Benoit Claise
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6110 … Benoit Claise
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6110 … Jernej Tuljak
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6110 … Jernej Tuljak
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6110 … Ladislav Lhotka
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6110 … t.petch
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6110 … Ladislav Lhotka
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6110 … t.petch
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6110 … Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6110 … Benoit Claise
- [netmod] Last Call on the updated errata 3362 (wa… Benoit Claise
- Re: [netmod] Last Call on the updated errata 3362 Jernej Tuljak
- Re: [netmod] Last Call on the updated errata 3362 Benoit Claise
- Re: [netmod] Last Call on the updated errata 3362 Ladislav Lhotka
- Re: [netmod] Last Call on the updated errata 3362 Benoit Claise
- Re: [netmod] Last Call on the updated errata 3362 Benoit Claise