Re: error-path

[Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>]

Andy Bierman <ietf@andybierman.com> wrote:
> Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> >So the question is first if error-path should be allowed for
> >rpc/protocol error-types?  If so, should the root be different
> >depending on error-type?  If it's always the same (top-level), my
> >first example would be
> >
> >  <error-path xmlns:srv="http://www.tail-f.com/test";>
> >    /rpc/edit-config/config/srv:servers/srv:server
> >  </error-path>
> >  
> 
> I think this was our intent -- that the error-path would be from the 
> 'rpc' root

Ok.


> Shouldn't the correct error-path in your example be:
>     /rpc/edit-config/config/srv:servers/srv:server/srv:foo
> 
> It needs to indicate the same node as <bad-element>.

The text says "the node which is associated with the error".  If the
error is missing-element, my interpretation was that the error is in
the parent.

If the intention is that error-path MUST indicate the same node as
bad-element, maybe this should be added to the text.


/martin

--
to unsubscribe send a message to netconf-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/netconf/>