Jeffrey Haas <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 12:29:35PM +0200, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> > Jeffrey Haas <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > In the proposed overlay model, presume that we have ephemeral data from a
> > > model that lives within an augmentation to a local config model. In other
> > > words, the ephemeral nodes are children of the local config nodes.
> > >
> > > Presume, per discussion, that the local config lives in the "config" data
> > > store and that the ephemeral config - the augmenting nodes above - live in
> > > the ephemeral data store.
> > >
> > > If we delete the container in the local config that the epehemeral config
> > > is
> > > augmenting, is there any expectation that such a deletion should carry
> > > through to the ephemeral config?
> > >
> > > Per the netmod interim discussion, probably not.
> >
> > My interpretation of the interim discussion is that the deletion
> > carries through.
>
> To be clear what I meant, consider:
>
> local config: ephemeral:
> A A/B - B is introduced as an augmentation of A
I think there might be a terminology confusion here, so let's do a
simple example.
list foo {
key id;
leaf id { type int32; }
leaf a { type int32; }
}
local config:
foo 42
In ephemeral config we now do SET /foo[id=42]/a to 4711. Thus, in
ephemeral we now have a single node (a) with value 4711.
What happens if we in local config delete foo 42?
If /foo[id=42]/a is NOT deleted from the ephemeral config, what is now
presented to the internal apps?
/martin
_______________________________________________
i2rs mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
