Re: nested operation attribute interoperability

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

I agree that top-down processing makes most sense (that's what we do
today). 

So, what should the table be?  Like this maybe

child ->  create   merge   replace   delete
parent
  |

 none      V        V        V         V

create     x        V        V         E-1

merge      V        x        V         V

replace    V        V        x         E-1

delete     E-1      V        E-1       x


The E-1 on delete under replace would be motivated by the fact that
replace is first delete, then create.  So it should give the same
error as delete under create.

The only question mark is maybe the last row.   Why should merge under
delete be allowed?  (maybe for convenience; default operation is
'merge', and with this you can do:

   <user operation="delete">
      <name>fred</name>
   </user>

to delete the fred user, if <name> is used as key.)



/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/>