Re: [YANG] relation to XML PDUs

Andy Bierman <ietf@andybierman.com> wrote:
> Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> > Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@cesnet.cz> wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I understand that YANG data models describe entire configuration
> >> datasets, but do they also pose any restrictions to the NETCONF XML
> >> PDUs? For example: the order of children in a YANG model is fixed - does
> >> it mean that the corresponding XML elements in PDUs must appear in the
> >> same order?
> > 
> > Currently we do this, mainly b/c of the requirement to be XSD
> > compatible, i.e. we want to be able to generate an XSD which can be
> > used to validate the PDUs.
> > 
> 
> 
> Really?  Where is that documented?

In the XML Encoding Rules section of the container statetement (and
same for list statement).

> Let's review the NETCONF PDUs so we can stop talking about
> schema validation in high altitude abstractions.

[...]

>   3) XML represents config database fragment
>      XSD cannot do much with this unless minOccurs=0 is set for
>      every element and the NETCONF operation attribute is added
>      everywhere it is allowed.  I have never seen an XSD that
>      actually does this.  Instead they all model the config-database
>      representation, not any particular PDU.

I'm not protesting here.  So if they do model the config-database
representation, is the order important in this config-database?  Is
the NETCONF server supposed to keep an XML instance document
representation of the config database, with all elements in order?
This sounds like vendor-specific internals...

/martin

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