On May 1, 2014:11:02 AM, at 11:02 AM, Andy Bierman <[email protected]> wrote:

> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 7:46 AM, Jeffrey Haas <[email protected]> wrote:
> Tom,
> 
> On Thu, May 01, 2014 at 10:01:38AM +0100, t.petch wrote:
> > But, Jeff, you then say, in a parallel post
> >
> > "The issues then comes back to the ones noted in
> > draft-bjorklund-netmod-operational-00: How do we distinguish
> > operational,
> > config or ephemeral config states? "
> >
> > whereas I see operational state, config and read-only statistics, with
> > state (unqualified) referring to the first and last collectively!
> > 'ephemeral' does not appear in Martin's I-D, nor would I expect it to -
> > I don't see it as a concept in YANG/NETCONF.
> 
> I agree it is not currently part of Netconf/Yang.  This is part of why I
> raise the question.
> 
> > There is a separate issue of persistent and ephemeral in YANG, or,
> > arguably, in NETCONF, which is also not documented AFAICS.  This is
> > probably of less interest to I2RS at this time.
> 
> I actually think it's one of our bigger sticking points - or at least
> something we need a clear answer on if N/Y is to be considered for i2rs use.
> I2RS state is intended to be ephemeral. (See architecture document.)
> 
> 
> I think this has been explained several times already,
> starting in the IETF 89 slides.
> 
> I don't think anybody has said NC/RC/YANG could be used
> as the I2RS protocol without a single change.  People has said
> it is the best starting point for I2RS.  There seemed to be an overwhelming
> consensus in the London meeting and on this mailing list to
> use NC or RC + YANG as the I2RS starting point.
> 
> IMO, there needs to be a new datastore in the architecture that
> contains I2RS data. The I2RS protocol will define how this data is accessed.
> It's really not that complicated.
> 
> There are many implementations using NC/RC + YANG, and many of
> these vendors have stated that they believe this approach can
> be made to work for I2RS.

        I agree. I am not sure why we keep going round and round about these 
issues. Its been clear from the start that while yang/netconf
is a modeling language and protocol that can be used as a solid basis to solve 
the problems here, both need some minor modifications. 
In the case of yang, we've gone over many of the mods needed recently. NetMod 
is *currently* working on yang 1.1 which are minor 
changes that are probably a good vehicle to catch those changes, but waiting 
for another 9 months while we debate using the other
9 options will miss that window.  As for NetConf, we need to be able to relax 
the commit sequence/locking/back-out operations
so we have a "cut through" mechanism for fast programming. It is that simple. 
This has all been discussed at length over a year ago. 
We cannot wait forever for this WG to debate things ad infinitum.  When can we 
get to producing some relevant solutions?

        --Tom



> 
> > If there is one running datastore, then, presumably, it is persistent
> > (across reboots) - the documents appear not to say.  If there is running
> > and startup, presumably startup is persistent and running is not.  But
> > if you have running and acme-special datastores, then which is
> > persistent?  This is one of several issues, like operational state, that
> > have surfaced from time to time and, for me, have not got nailed down as
> > well as I would like, and so - surface from time to time.
> 
> 
> I2RS does not have any interaction with the "local config" except maybe
> to read it.  The NETCONF configuration datastores (candidate, running, 
> startup) are
> not going to be used by I2RS.  Nothing I2RS does is going to even slightly
> alter the definition of any NETCONF configuration procedures.
> 
> 
> This covers my point.  Moving this particular bit of discussion to Juergen's
> response to me in another thread.
> 
> -- Jeff
> 
> Andy
> 
> _______________________________________________
> i2rs mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

_______________________________________________
i2rs mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs

Reply via email to