Re: [YANG] new pyang errors

Mandatory in YANG means mandatory to configure.
Today YANG considers all mandatory and optional elements mandatory to implement.

Later we will probably define a conformance mechanism, then YANG will be able to say:

module foo defines 100 leafs and these 85 are mandatory to implement and the rest is optional.

We consider this conformance mechanism to belong to step to in the DML. AFAIK it is not really 
used in SNMP either. (We could start using mustImplement or something similar as a term for 
mandatory to implement.)

Balazs

Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> Phil Shafer píše v Pá 25. 01. 2008 v 01:14 -0500:
>> "Randy Presuhn" writes:
>>> In the SNMP/SMI worlds, the "optionality" Ladislav refers to is
>>> handled by conformance statements, rather than the model per se.
>> Ah so maybe the confusion is "mandatory to implement" versus
>> "mandatory to configure".  YANG's mandatory statement is the latter.
> 
> Oh yes, this is the Pudels Kern :-) I am sorry I wasn't able to express
> myself so concisely. However, I still think Sec. 7.6.4 in the YANG draft
> can be understood as "mandatory to implement": >>If "mandatory" is
> "true", the node must exist in a valid configuration if its parent node
> exists.<< I guess it's again due to the different meanings of validity.
> 
> Lada
> 
>> YANG has no conformance mechanism.  Whether it appears in YANG-2.0,
>> I can't predict, but I'm hoping we can make base models that devices
>> can implement, with augmentations for additional config.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>  Phil
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> YANG mailing list
>> YANG@ietf.org
>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yang

-- 
Balazs Lengyel                       Ericsson Hungary Ltd.
TSP System Manager
ECN: 831 7320                        Fax: +36 1 4377792
Tel: +36-1-437-7320     email: Balazs.Lengyel@ericsson.com

_______________________________________________
YANG mailing list
YANG@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yang