Re: [netmod] 'status' statement needed on every node

[Robert Wilton <[e-mail]>]

On 06/09/2017 14:53, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 06, 2017 at 01:32:19PM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>> Juergen Schoenwaelder píše v St 06. 09. 2017 v 13:10 +0200:
>>> On Wed, Sep 06, 2017 at 10:34:33AM +0100, Robert Wilton wrote:
>>>
>>>> I would prefer if it status was inherited (as an errata to 6020, 7950).
>>> Erratas are not a tool to change a specification. You have to write
>>> and RFC that updates 6020 and 7950 in order to change what these RFCs
>>> say. This requires full WG / IETF consensus since the change affects
>>> implementations.
>> A current node with a deprecated ancestor doesn't make sense, so it
>> looks like an omission. IMO, a technical erratum is then
>> appropriate.
> You can make status work recursively via an erratum. It clearly does
> not work recursively in the YANG specifications.
>
> And as explain before, given that we have augmentations, current
> definitions below deprecated definitions cannot be avoided.
It seems like there are two different meanings (or interpretations) of 
what the "status" of a node is:

The first is in the module definition, where the author of the YANG 
model indicates whether they think the definition is still current or not.

The second is within a set of modules on a device, where the status of 
the node depends both on the YANG "status" statement for the given node, 
but also the actual status of the parent node.

Thanks,
Rob

>
> /js
>