[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: error-path

Martin Bjorklund wrote:


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.



Actually, in this case, you should be using <missing-element>,
not <bad-element>, and <error-path> should point to 'foo',
which is the missing element.

We need to stop adding tiny little details to the draft.
IMO, we don't need to change anything here.

NOTE WELL:

  Implementation guidelines and errata will be collected
  and published separately (online) from now on.
  The IESG wants the final document versions now.
  Pencils down. Pass your papers to the front of the class  ;-)



/martin


Andy


--
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/>





--
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/>