Re: [netmod] Query about draft-ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis-06 - Part -2

[Rohit R Ranade <[e-mail]>]

Hi All,

Continuing with the below queries.

5.  For a module like "ietf-netconf-notifications", which implements only notifications. I think this module is not suitable to be put in any of the data-stores. So a separate module-set has to be prepared for such modules but not included in any data-store. Is it correct ?
6. Similar logic will apply to any module which only defines "rpc" statements also I think. Whether need to update the yang-library draft text mentioning these two scenarios ?

With Regards,
Rohit R Ranade

From: Rohit R Ranade
Sent: 09 May 2018 08:01
To: [e-mail]
Subject: [netmod] Query about draft-ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis-06

Hi All,


1.       "import-only-module" is currently under the "module-set" list. How does the client benefit by learning which module-set imports which modules ?

2.       Whether we can keep the "import-only-module" as a sibling to module-set. And let it list all the imported modules.

3.  Section 3 mentions the text  "A common use case is the operational state datastore schema which is a
  superset of the schema used by conventional configuration datastores. ". ==> I think it should be "maybe a superset" based on Point 3 of "Objectives" section.

4.       Also I feel the text about "netconf-capability-change" notification based on yang-library checksum should be moved to the NETCONF NMDA draft.  Is it not more suitable there ?

With Regards,
Rohit R Ranade