-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 15
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
Incompatible ENUM and boolean representations #69
Comments
@kot-begemot-uk Hi Anton, |
RFC8040 and the netconf RFCs specify that ENUMs are represented by their named values and boolean is represnted by true and false. The yang RFCs (both yang 1.0 and 1.1) are also fairly specific that the numeric values for enum are purely "implementer's business" and should not be used for interchange. |
Example violations: Out of reported data 75% are in violation of the RFCs to start off with and unacceptable to any RFC compliant implementation. |
All standardized representations for ENUM and boolean such as RFC 4717, 7951, etc use the textual representation of ENUMs and booleans.
CPS presently can only understand or generate the numerical for ENUMs and uses 0/1 instead of true/false for booleans. This use of yang modeled data is not interoperable and requires the use of yang models to convert it to an interop form on every operation.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: