ietf-hardware.yang add reason for state

[luke-orden]

I am looking to use the draft ietf-hardware model and have a couple of comments that I would like feedback on.

I think it would make sense to add a field to the component state called reason or something similar to hold the error message casing the state. i.e FPC 0 Major Errors. What do you think?

Also I do not see a alarm-state for green, or good. How should this be modelled?

@wlupton I guess this is a question for you.

[einarnn]

Luke, The authors of this model may not look at the git repo here, so you may want to drop a note on the IETF netmod working group mailer. Cheers, Einar

…

On Jul 14, 2017, 5:34 AM -0500, Luke Overend ***@***.***>, wrote: I am looking to use the draft ietf-hardware model and have a couple of comments that I would like feedback on. I think it would make sense to add a field to the component state called reason or something similar to hold the error message casing the state. i.e FPC 0 Major Errors. What do you think? Also I do not see a alarm-state for green, or good. How should this be modelled? — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

[luke-orden]

Thanks @einarnn,

I have emailed by question to netmod@ietf.org.