Re: [netmod] Does defining a feature require the module be implemented?

[Martin Björklund <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

Kent Watsen <[e-mail]> wrote:
> YANG Doctors, 
> 
> 
> Does "foo" need to be "implemented", in order for its feature to be
> define?
> 
> 	module foo {
> 	  yang-version 1.1;
> 	  namespace "https://example.net/foo";
> 	  prefix "f";
> 
> 	  feature foo-feature;
> 
>           ...
> 	}
> 
> 
> Specifically, using the previous YANG Library (RFC 7895), would this
> be possible:
> 
>       {
>         "name": "foo",
>         "feature": [
>           "foo-feature"
>         ],
>         "namespace": "https://example.net/foo",
>         "conformance-type": "import"
>       },
> 
> 
> Or does "foo" also need to be "implemented", in order for its feature
> to be defined?
> 
> 
> PS: the answer to this impacts the "crypto-types and friends" drafts
> in the NETCONF WG, where it is assumed (and various tools agreed, sans
> a recent change in `yanglint`) that the implementation-status of a
> module is orthogonal to what features supported.

Can you show a specific example where this is a problem?


/martin



> 
> Thanks,
> Kent
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod