Re: nested operation attribute interoperability

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

Andy Bierman <ietf@andybierman.com> wrote:
> > child ->  create   merge   replace   delete
> > parent
> >     |
> >  
> >    none      V        V        V         V
> >  
> >   create     x        V-1      E-1(*)    E-1
> > 
> >   merge      V-3      x        V-4(*)    V-3    
> > 
> >   replace    E-1(*)   V        x         E-1(*)
> > 
> >   delete     E-1      V-2      E-1(*)    x
> > 
> > 
> >> Notes:
> >>
> >> V:    valid, no errors or warnings
> >>
> >> V-1:  valid, but create has precedence.
> >>       Only merge-with-nothing or replace-nothing scenarios are valid.
> >>
> >> V-2:  valid, but has no effect because delete has precedence
> >>
> >> V-3:  valid, but create or delete rules now in affect for next child
> >>
> >> E-1:  'bad-attribute' or 'operation-failed' error (not sure which)
> >>       Requirements for create and delete cannot both be met
> >>       in the same subtree, regardless of the data model
> >>
> 
> 
> 
> I think your E-1 is wrong.

Do you mean the first one (replace when parent is create)?   The only
reason for allowing this is due to "be liberal in what you accept",
right?  I guess we could also allow delete when parent is create by
the same reasoning.

Allowing create under a replace might make sense though, if we want to
be liberal.

I'm happy to change this code to make it interopable.


/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/>