On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Benoit Claise <[email protected]> wrote:
> Joel,
>
> On top of what Jürgen wrote, we stressed the need for such a requirement
> document to both I2RS chairs during the last IETF meeting.
> The good news is that some of the requirements were mentioned on the
> microphone during the Sunday YANG editing session and/or the NETMOD meeting
> (my memory fails me).
>
> Regards, Benoit
>
> On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 09:58:57PM -0400, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
>>
>>> Juergen,
>>> While I understand the request, I presume that such a request can
>>> not be met as a working group agreement in the time frame suggested.
>>> WHile I hope that some of the folks who have been involved in proposing
>>> the use of YANG for I2RS will write such a draft, I can not see how we
>>> could even get tot eh point of WG adoption of such a draft, much less WG
>>> rough consensus on the content, in the time frame you outline.
>>> Of course, I am not one of the chairs or ADs, but it seems pretty
>>> clear cut to me.
>>>
>>
I agree with Joel that the I2RS does not have consensus on the details.
The slides I presented in London and subsequent discussions suggest this
solution:
1) define YANG extension to identify I2RS data so typedefs, etc. can be
shared
in config and state data models
2) define an I2RS datastore
3) define or extend a protocol to manage the I2RS datastore
Let's say there is a new datastore added to the RESTCONF architecture for
I2RS.
Explain how this datastore works. It seems to have the same validation
rules
as YANG running config rules. The only difference seems to be that the
I2RS datastore
is not NV-saved (or NV-loaded at boot-time) like the running datastore.
YANG 1.1 has some cleanup work planned to make the text less
NETCONF-specific.
I don't think there is much datastore and NV-store specific text that would
need to change.
Andy
Joel,
>>
>> all I need is reasonably agreed upon input. Note that this request for
>> input is not coming out of the blue, at least not for those I2RS folks
>> who have been at the NETMOD meeting in Toronto.
>>
>> As NETMOD chair, I do have a target date to deliver YANG 1.1 and I
>> take that milestone serious. My motivation to delay this by N months
>> waiting for I2RS to get their input submitted is very small. I recall
>> that there were presentations about "what is missing" bach in London,
>> that is March 2014. The regular submission period for YANG 1.1 issues
>> was 2014-02-23 until 2014-05-07. The interim meeting is mid September.
>>
>> /js
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>
_______________________________________________
i2rs mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
