IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [netmod] [OPSAWG] Minor change in ietf-access-control-list@2018-02-02.yang

Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net> Fri, 09 February 2018 21:24 UTC

Return-Path: <kwatsen@juniper.net>
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 984061270AE for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Feb 2018 13:24:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.701
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=juniper.net
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id b_HClGD5_Gqc for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Feb 2018 13:23:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com (mx0a-00273201.pphosted.com [208.84.65.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 25F011242F7 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Fri, 9 Feb 2018 13:23:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0108157.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-00273201.pphosted.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w19LNZa9006521; Fri, 9 Feb 2018 13:23:58 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=juniper.net; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=PPS1017; bh=6ZDnvkjZ/gddLP3Gb1WEYGx3sWQCbIMh4c+cwXBLmbI=; b=VLlR2AXJHpcaMrGPXAKdwyYNIlyNGE+p8dAwvAS3FEuuKhtg4B+8UK0UCoBWslxNQZjT Is2GH1nOpmadn+Lg/XneRC4p7xj488GI9RRyP0TUBaNuWnsjdXSnQkfZGQaPnfdjAcqD EBHP8VidIi9BS6BeNM1oZBKhKfijtWrMYIOIcsdtAjhlOpnpL7O5L1Q/DT4PyKHRCz+Y cb8vvxlj4wwhKGPSFi09zSae+j9fkWxDrYTyoxNXU8KXejWfzsWy74PgIT1V4p2m1PHF tXhK/uogQSaudhIHm5h3tey6tuMD7USY3IdDWzSsmoiPVqqFz/5QvJYEpTThLrdWBflD 4A==
Received: from nam01-bn3-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn3nam01lp0176.outbound.protection.outlook.com [216.32.180.176]) by mx0a-00273201.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2g1jfkg3b5-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 09 Feb 2018 13:23:58 -0800
Received: from DM5PR05MB3484.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.174.240.147) by DM5PR05MB3467.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.174.240.142) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P256) id 15.20.506.7; Fri, 9 Feb 2018 21:23:56 +0000
Received: from DM5PR05MB3484.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::7433:3915:f20d:6747]) by DM5PR05MB3484.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::7433:3915:f20d:6747%13]) with mapi id 15.20.0506.007; Fri, 9 Feb 2018 21:23:56 +0000
From: Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net>
To: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>, Jan Lindblad <janl@tail-f.com>
CC: netmod WG <netmod@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [netmod] [OPSAWG] Minor change in ietf-access-control-list@2018-02-02.yang
Thread-Index: AQHToYdR/zDWYmmDG0yVdYnnwYn9hqObza2AgAB0BoA=
Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2018 21:23:56 +0000
Message-ID: <8E0CD57D-9FFF-4363-B0CE-F4A42524367A@juniper.net>
References: <CAHiu4JMC6wDc16-Ronz7Ou0Ne9md7acAKJMpU0PN=Bub76tTPQ@mail.gmail.com> <1f32428b-6751-8303-9fc7-ac2c2a92990a@cisco.com> <DC46EA99-94E2-4512-82FA-74683083DFC9@tail-f.com> <6ecf354c-42f2-7dc2-f858-7e46f1721be1@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <6ecf354c-42f2-7dc2-f858-7e46f1721be1@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/f.20.0.170309
x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.14]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; DM5PR05MB3467; 7:M7IRxnxTYNliiXHP9EGf8AQke0l8/iAeEh1DQnpiuFWfehgSGBiiWpylaC6v0zBKwInQ7y6RxINdl9nCjoC4KUQgyyVfu6tlzYRpDgpkDCFRdHOht4fHBhruSbvD3yqHM4dVQkDju6AcB3nhgSvCpfn5CxDoa3rhMIE9FDAWw9mVyQ3jNSrwoOBSm/0BmcSYU47+wh0E8tIcceT7f2U0+DJrL0aAuFpK576o8lIUbEYwI6BpWY/8ZINbyA/Xvm0O
x-ms-exchange-antispam-srfa-diagnostics: SSOS;
x-ms-office365-filtering-ht: Tenant
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: ee1423f7-c9a9-4e7c-5b8e-08d570036d37
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(7020095)(4652020)(48565401081)(5600026)(4604075)(3008032)(4534165)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(2017052603307)(7153060)(7193020); SRVR:DM5PR05MB3467;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: DM5PR05MB3467:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <DM5PR05MB346712A5241EB442DFBD5F8CA5F20@DM5PR05MB3467.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(788757137089);
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(6040501)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(3002001)(3231101)(2400082)(944501161)(93006095)(93001095)(10201501046)(6055026)(6041288)(20161123564045)(20161123558120)(20161123562045)(20161123560045)(201703131423095)(201702281528075)(20161123555045)(201703061421075)(201703061406153)(6072148)(201708071742011); SRVR:DM5PR05MB3467; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:DM5PR05MB3467;
x-forefront-prvs: 057859F9C5
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(346002)(376002)(396003)(39860400002)(39380400002)(366004)(199004)(189003)(5423002)(6436002)(6246003)(5660300001)(81156014)(58126008)(82746002)(110136005)(25786009)(345774005)(97736004)(8676002)(2900100001)(5250100002)(3660700001)(316002)(3846002)(478600001)(6486002)(99286004)(6512007)(83506002)(106356001)(83716003)(105586002)(26005)(86362001)(6506007)(36756003)(53546011)(59450400001)(66066001)(7736002)(6346003)(229853002)(6116002)(2906002)(76176011)(305945005)(102836004)(14454004)(2950100002)(3280700002)(33656002)(53936002)(93886005)(8936002)(4326008)(68736007)(81166006)(186003)(221513004)(222073002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:DM5PR05MB3467; H:DM5PR05MB3484.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: RAo2aAvtVvaQtKOlKCb236e/YsLg1o4EUeLlbBRN9zJLxxXc5Iv1PRumgfjkeCA6I1py63NHm5w5EK7wIBBt6w==
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <1EEDDAFC62D4734B8A5C1516438A9E49@namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: ee1423f7-c9a9-4e7c-5b8e-08d570036d37
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 09 Feb 2018 21:23:56.1725 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM5PR05MB3467
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2018-02-09_11:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_spam_notspam policy=outbound_spam score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1711220000 definitions=main-1802090270
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/mwDurCBsGObKK7hq1IvQGQhrRxE>
Subject: Re: [netmod] [OPSAWG] Minor change in ietf-access-control-list@2018-02-02.yang
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 09 Feb 2018 21:24:03 -0000

Yes, it may be a bug in ODL, but I also think that there is something wrong to use such a long relative path.  In that case, the relative path is actually longer than the absolute path!  That said, there is no guidance in rfc6087bis currently, so we may need to let it go this time.

K. // shepherd

===== original message =====

This may be. bug in OpenDaylight that is being tickled.  Ranga is
chasing it a bit.


On 09.02.18 10:20, Jan Lindblad wrote:
> Eliot,
>
>> In order to compile the published YANG model with OpenDaylight Yangtools I had to make the following change ( diff published file vs. changed file is below ):
>>
>> 583c583
>> <                 path "../../../../../../acl/name";
>> ---
>>>                 path "/access-lists/acl/name";
>> 597c597
>> <                   path "../../../../../../../acl/aces/ace/name";
>> ---
>>>                   path "/access-lists/acl/aces/ace/name";
>>
>> I am not sure (don't have enough YANG experience) to know if the error is with Yangtools or with the published YANG model but I thought I'd send this information to the list just in case.
>>
>> Thank you for your attention.
> Both the old and the new path look valid to me. Even if you can always replace a relative path with an absolute from a YANG validity perspective, changing from relative to absolute paths often *changes the semantics*, so that is not generally safe. In this case, however, they do amount to the same thing (since they both end up going all the way up to the top level container).
>
> /jan
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email