Re: [netmod] Does the YANG "status" statement inherit from its parent node?

[Robert Wilton <[e-mail]>]

On 22/12/2016 10:00, Andy Bierman wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 11:49 PM, Ladislav Lhotka <[e-mail] 
> <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>
>
>     > On 22 Dec 2016, at 07:22, Randy Presuhn
>     <[e-mail]
>     <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>     >
>     > Hi -
>     >
>     > On 12/21/2016 3:55 PM, Andy Bierman wrote:
>     >>
>     >>
>     >> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 3:41 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder
>     >> <[e-mail]
>     <mailto:[e-mail]>
>     >> <mailto:[e-mail]
>     <mailto:[e-mail]>>> wrote:
>     > ...
>     >>    Perhaps I am blinded by the way @deprecate or __attribute__
>     >>    ((deprecated)) or [[deprecated]] work in various programming
>     >>    languages. All these annotations do not deprecate my code,
>     they just
>     >>    cause the generation of warnings so that I get aware of the
>     issue and
>     >>    can do my homework.
>     >>
>     >>
>     >> There are no protocols that let you manage orphaned data nodes
>     >> without any parent.  No way to represent it in XML or JSON either.
>     >> No way to specify a RESTCONF target resource that leaves out
>     >> some intermediate data nodes.
>     >
>     > Deprecating (or obsoleting) a definition does not orphan data nodes.
>     > Perhaps I'm blinded by the way SNMP works, but it seems to me that
>     > a robust client will need to be able to process data corresponding
>     > to deprecated (or obsolete) definitions.  Likewise, developers
>     > of server-side software may find themselves in situations where
>     > supporting obsolete definitions is a commercial necessity.  Things
>     > certainly played out that way in the SNMP world.  I agree with
>     Juergen
>     > that tool-generated warnings seem to be the correct way to go.
>
>     I agree that making a node deprecated or obsolete doesn't mean
>     that its descendants are orphaned, it just means they cannot be
>     current, and then "current" shouldn't be the default status for
>     them - also because the descendants may come from other modules
>     (via groupings and augments) that cannot be changed.
>
>     Even if the default status is inherited, tools can still generate
>     warnings. A data modeller can decide whether and where it makes
>     sense to have the "status" statement explicitly, but isn't forced
>     to do it everywhere.
>
>
>
> NETCONF and RESTCONF have no mechanisms for accessing data other than
> top-down from the top-level YANG data node to the target node.
> Removing an ancestor node from the server implementation effectively 
> removes
> the entire subtree from the implementation.  (The value of the YANG 
> status-stmt
> of the descendant nodes has nothing to do with it)

I agree that this certainly seems to be the case if a node is marked as 
obsolete.  It seems that it implicitly forces all child nodes to be 
obsolete as well regardless of which module they were defined in.

Rob