-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 659
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Fix ospf lsdb router-lsa link list #1080
Conversation
No major YANG version changes in commit ae1fb73 |
What's the motivation for |
In this case it's because the |
Whilst I see the argument here -- it seems that the two things are the same -- i.e., this leaf is no longer in the model. If I'm a developer now implementing the model whether it's From a tooling perspective though, we now need to ensure that all toolchains support both variants -- which are the same "don't generate for this leaf" where is code, documentation etc. I prefer to limit our use of YANG "twiddles" to the absolute minimum possible -- supporting them in toolchains has been painful. |
No worries, I'll deprecate the node instead. The node seems not usable as is, but the new node which replaces it doesn't conflict, so it seems there is little harm to leaving this node present in a deprecated form until a future major OC release. I appreciate any thoughts on this approach as well. FWIW, deprecated means supported, but scheduled for deletion in an future release. Obsolete is the same as deleting the node from the model, but leaves the information what what the node used to be intact. I proposed obsolete here as I was curious about whether we should use 'obsolete' as we do the keyword 'reserved' in proto. Of course, the same issue with field numbering doesn't exist in yang (except perhaps with enums). |
Upon reviewing with OC operators, we realized that there are many breaking changes here due to moving the leafs for links into the link list and moving the types of service list underneath the new link list. Since router-lsa is currently a broken node, it seems to make sense to just delete the link-id as well and make this a breaking change. |
@DonaMaria2024 for your review |
@DonaMaria2024 please provide any comments. I am waiting for an OC reviewer to give the final LGTM and then this can move to last call. |
Adding to last-call. This will be merged on May 30, 2024 |
Metric is the cost of a router-link which is a per link attribute. |
|
||
uses ospfv2-lsdb-router-lsa-link-state-specification; | ||
} | ||
uses ospfv2-lsdb-generic-lsa-tos-metric-structure; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
hmm is this an extra uses that is no longer necessary - i didn't notice this before that there are now 2 metrics?
Hi, Please find comments from [email protected] below.
Thanks, |
Fixes #1074
Operational use case
OSPF router-lsa describes a list of link-ids, but the OC model only allows for a single link id. This PR moves the link-id and it's attributes to a new list inside of the router-lsa.
Change Scope
obsolete
link-id
leaf should be deprecated instead of deleted.Also note this proposes using the yang status
obsolete
for the leaf. OpenConfig has not traditionally used this status.Consider this a solicitation for comments if we should start using obsolete for 'deleted' leafs, versus removing them from the model entirely.
Tree view