[YANG] 7.8.3 unique statement
Andy Bierman <ietf@andybierman.com> Thu, 10 January 2008 12:29 UTC
Return-path: <yang-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com)
by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1JCwXe-0003AV-6D; Thu, 10 Jan 2008 07:29:50 -0500
Received: from yang by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43)
id 1JCwXc-0003AQ-DT
for yang-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 10 Jan 2008 07:29:48 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org)
by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCwXb-0003AI-Ae
for yang@ietf.org; Thu, 10 Jan 2008 07:29:48 -0500
Received: from smtp123.sbc.mail.sp1.yahoo.com ([69.147.64.96])
by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCwXa-0005nz-UF
for yang@ietf.org; Thu, 10 Jan 2008 07:29:47 -0500
Received: (qmail 25864 invoked from network); 10 Jan 2008 12:29:46 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.0.10?) (andybierman@att.net@68.120.84.5
with plain)
by smtp123.sbc.mail.sp1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 10 Jan 2008 12:29:46 -0000
X-YMail-OSG: .Bunax0VM1n5jTpqkR497iIw6qiV1SSqYcuNdbjQQAuP0aTG
Message-ID: <47860FBA.6090600@andybierman.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 04:29:46 -0800
From: Andy Bierman <ietf@andybierman.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: yang <yang@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 7655788c23eb79e336f5f8ba8bce7906
Subject: [YANG] 7.8.3 unique statement
X-BeenThere: yang@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: YANG modeling Language for NETCONF <yang.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yang>,
<mailto:yang-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/yang>
List-Post: <mailto:yang@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:yang-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yang>,
<mailto:yang-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: yang-bounces@ietf.org
Hi,
There seem to be many details left out for the unique-stmt (within a list)
that need to be in a standard:
- what if not all the leafs listed in the unique-stmt are mandatory?
- is the unique-stmt ignored?
- Is NULL-value treated as one of the unique values?
- what if some missing leafs have defaults (ensuring they will not be unique)?
- where are the detailed specifications of the canonical formats
for each YANG datatype (especially bits, anyxml, string) so that
every implementation will come up with the same answer when evaluating
uniqueness?
- what is the exact behavior required for a NETCONF agent wrt/ <edit-config>
processing and unique-stmt enforcement?
- Is there any significance to the order of node identifiers?
unique "addr port";
unique "port addr";
- Are the target nodes limited to direct definitions and expanded uses?
(I.e., unique clauses that include leafs expanded from augment not allowed)
Andy
_______________________________________________
YANG mailing list
YANG@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yang
- [YANG] 7.8.3 unique statement Andy Bierman
- Re: [YANG] 7.8.3 unique statement Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [YANG] 7.8.3 unique statement Andy Bierman
- Re: [YANG] 7.8.3 unique statement Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [YANG] 7.8.3 unique statement Andy Bierman
- Re: [YANG] 7.8.3 unique statement Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [YANG] 7.8.3 unique statement Balazs Lengyel