Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6110 (3362)
Ladislav Lhotka <ladislav@lhotka.name> Fri, 21 September 2012 16:04 UTC
Return-Path: <ladislav@lhotka.name>
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 24AA021E8083 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 09:04:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[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 kJUsc0OCA-bc for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 09:04:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from trail.lhotka.name (trail.lhotka.name [77.48.224.143]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B456A21E8082 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 09:04:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by trail.lhotka.name (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B05E540466; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 18:04:36 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from trail.lhotka.name ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (trail.lhotka.name [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Y3gzHMsudn0E; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 18:04:11 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [172.29.2.202] (unknown [10.107.191.189]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by trail.lhotka.name (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6C41C54022E; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 18:04:11 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.0 \(1486\))
From: Ladislav Lhotka <ladislav@lhotka.name>
In-Reply-To: <20120921154850.6A92C72E038@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2012 18:04:09 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <18308163-4F9F-4545-8C38-0CAD86685B20@lhotka.name>
References: <20120921154850.6A92C72E038@rfc-editor.org>
To: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1486)
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 01:22:10 -0700
Cc: netmod@ietf.org, lhotka@cesnet.cz, rbonica@juniper.net, jernej.tuljak@mg-soft.com
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: Fri, 21 Sep 2012 16:14:07 -0000
Hi, this erratum should be verified, the reporter is absolutely right. Ladislav Lhotka, editor of RFC 6110 On Sep 21, 2012, at 5:48 PM, RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> wrote: > > 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 -- Ladislav Lhotka PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C
- [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