[Note that I'm making this comment for posterity so that the IESG doesn't ask the same thing of other draft authors.]
On Thu, Jul 05, 2018 at 06:18:42AM -0700, Eric Rescorla wrote: > On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 6:10 AM, Reshad Rahman (rrahman) <rrah...@cisco.com> > wrote: > > <RR2> The pyang tool does this for real references (leafref) but not in > > the grouping case (which is reuse and not reference). Even though there is > > replication in the tree diagrams, I believe there is benefit in seeing the > > complete tree for each module. > > > > Well, this is a comment so you're free to ignore it, but IMO it makes it > very hard to read these. The fundamental issue here is one of clear representation of a node being instantiated vs. the semantic idea that we're seeing a template (grouping) instantiated. At the moment, pyang output is showing that when you use a grouping, you get an actual node in the tree. Given that things like augmentations cannot be done to groupings as a logical entity and have impact everywhere, this is perhaps an important detail, if annoying. The proper place to pursue a fix to this is asking for a bis on RFC 8340. -- Jeff
