jsterne

Even if this is converted to a union, i.e. changed from this: ``` leaf neighbor-address { type oc-inet:ip-address; } ``` to this: ``` leaf neighbor-address { union { type oc-inet:ip-address;...

OK thx. That's in sync with the backwards compatibility rules in RFC7950 (although this particular example of going from 'type x' to a union that includes 'type x' often causes...

Hi aredmon8551 - can you clarify what this 'role' leaf maps to in some common router implementations ? (ideally with a specific config path/command ?). For example: Cisco IOS-XR and...

The IOS-XR and SR OS user groups are probably often used as a "role", but those would be either user-created groups (where command auth permissions are defined) or maybe in...

I'm not familiar with that gNSI authorization but the work I was thinking of was this: https://github.com/openconfig/public/pull/524 Making 'role' mandatory when the OpenConfig model doesn't have a way to create...

> w.r.t whether we can make this mandatory, @jsterne -- today, does SROS have well-defined roles? If so, then this wouldn't necessarily prevent having the leaf as mandatory, but I...

We do map that leaf to our two built in groups (called 'profiles' in SR OS): admin and default. We don't error if there isn't a role (but from a...

Hi all - I didn't realize there was already discussion around this topic in PR#682 (e.g. examples were already provided there - sorry I missed that). I'll take a look...

After looking through PR#682 and thinking about this more, I think it is probably OK to make this mandatory. There is still the question of how role (and permissions associated...

If we have the following history of OpenConfig versions like this: `v3.1.0 -> v3.2.0 -> v3.3.0 -> v4.0.0` would there ever be a bug fix, enhancement, or other change made...