gNMI Depth Extension documentation #205
Conversation
|
@robshakir @dplore here is a documentation entry for gnmi depth |
|
Hi @dplore @robshakir |
|
Hi @dplore @robshakir |
| @@ -0,0 +1,271 @@ | |||
| # gNMI Depth Extension | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you wrap the doc to 80 chars please?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks @robshakir
I also addressed other review comments in f28e8fa
rpc/gnmi/gnmi-depth.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| Value of 1 means only the specified path and its direct children will be returned. See Children section for more info. | ||
|
|
||
| #### 3.1.2 Value of N+ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe word this just as Value of N -- I'm not quite sure I understand the + here, and since its a uint32, it's not like we can include the + in the value.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
good call, will address this
rpc/gnmi/gnmi-depth.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| ### 3.2 Children nodes | ||
|
|
||
| The Depth extension operates the value of "direct children of a schema node". What we understand by direct children: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Since gNMI covers more than YANG-modelled data, then I think it is desirable to have the specification apply to data that is not YANG modelled. Particularly, we could do this by specifying scalar values, and arrays of scalar values. You can tie it to the examples in YANG if desired.
It's probably equally valid to say that any node in the tree that is a leaf node is returned, and explicitly nodes that are the root of a subtree are not returned.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
agree, will add an interpretation of this
rpc/gnmi/gnmi-depth.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| ## 4 Examples | ||
|
|
||
| Using the data model from Section 2 we will run through a set of examples using the patched version of [openconfig/gnmic](https://gnmic.openconfig.net/) client with the added Depth extension support. We can provide the patched gnmic binary for Linux x86_84 if you want to try it out. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd suggest removing the "we can provide..." sentence for the specification here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
apoligies, this was a leftover from the original issue description
Co-authored-by: Rob Shakir <robjs@google.com>
Documentation entry to compliment openconfig/gnmi#166
Rendered doc can be seen here.