Description
The idea that isConfiguration() boils down to a simple boolean is flawed, as DataSchemaNodes defined under a grouping can be either. There are three basic models here:
module foo {
grouping foo {
container indeterminate {
// ancestors is neither true or false, hence we do not know
}
}
container cfg {
// No config, defaults to true
grouping foo {
container indeterminate {
// ancestor is config=true, but this may be used in config=false
}
}
}
container oper {
// Explicitly false
config false;
grouping foo {
container false {
// ancestor is config=false and hence this can only be referenced
// by other config=false nodes.
}
}
}
}
For the purposes of modeling, though, DataSchemaNodes defined within a grouping hierarchy should have a isConfiguration=UNDEF.
Semantically the question is what happens to nodes in notifications/actions/RPCs – they are not inherently tied to a particular data store, although RFC7950 would seem to imply these are runtime constructs and hence would be config=false. Since ODL extends the invocation model to allow RPC/action/notifications on any datastore, these should end up being undefined, too.
Attachments
Issue Links
- relates to
-
YANGTOOLS-957 YANG parser does not complain about list without key
-
- Resolved
-