Then the commit from A would have to be "commit what A wrote to running store" 
not "commit the running store".   No?

Don

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joel M. Halpern [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2014 11:17 PM
> To: Fedyk, Don; Joe Clarke; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [i2rs] Point about writable running
> 
> The case that causes complications for treating only one store is:
> 1) You have a running box, with a CLI client A and an I2RS client.  The I2RS
> client understands and expects that its changes will NOT be committed.
> 
> 2) In some order, A and B each make changes in the device.  It is sufficient 
> for
> this case that they are completely non-overlapping changes
> 
> 3) After both changes have been made, and the box is running happily, the CLI
> client says "commit".
> 
> In order to meet the I2RS requirements, the data that the I2RS client has
> provided MUST NOT be saved in persistent store.  Things may well break if it 
> is
> stored.
> 
> Yours,
> Joel
> 
> On 11/13/14, 11:08 PM, Fedyk, Don wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > I've been trying to understand the models here.  To me what we are
> describing is a general case of 2 entities trying to configure a switch.
> >
> > Consider one operator or user for short.
> > A user may be able to write to the running config datastore some subset.
> > A user may copy that to the config datastore (save config).  (If they
> > do not the copy the running subset is ephemeral)
> > Also:
> > A user may write to a candidate config datastore some subset.
> > A user may verify/activate the candidate config.
> > A user may commit that candidate config (once running) (save config). (If
> they do not commit that config subset is ephemeral).
> > Some devices do not support all config operations.
> >
> > Then consider two users trying both to config the same device.
> > A  user may be blocked from changing config items that are currently
> ephemeral.
> > A user may be allowed to override the config items that are ephemeral.
> > The override may be priority based where user A with higher priority can
> override user B but not the reverse.
> >
> > So if the user A is i2rs agent and the user B is an operator where the 
> > config
> items may allow priority per item,  doesn't this cover the bases for what is
> needed?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Don
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: i2rs [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Joel M.
> >> Halpern
> >> Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2014 10:06 PM
> >> To: Joe Clarke; [email protected]
> >> Subject: Re: [i2rs] Point about writable running
> >>
> >> I agree Joe.  The challenge with using any of the existing stores is
> >> that if someone says "commit" they need to get the NetConf / RestConf
> >> normal changes to that, but not the I2RS changes.
> >>
> >> Yours,
> >> Joel
> >>
> >> On 11/13/14, 9:57 PM, Joe Clarke wrote:
> >>> During today's meeting Dean made a comment that we could use
> >>> writable running as a way to do ephemeral state.  I have a concern about
> this.
> >>> I know it may seem like an implementation detail, but I feel that
> >>> most vendors (and operators) assume that things in the running
> >>> datastore _could_ become persistent.
> >>>
> >>> That is, if I write to the running data store, and my human user
> >>> sees these I2RS ephemeral state in the "show running-config" (or the
> >>> like), they might think those are persistent.  There is no
> >>> indication that they are ephemeral.  On top of that, some NMS
> >>> systems that use screen-scraping for config archive might grab this
> >>> ephemeral config and later restore state that should not be restored.
> >>>
> >>> I just wanted to bring this up as I would rather see more of the
> >>> panes of glass approach rather than try to override an existing
> >>> datastore for this kind of thing.  Or maybe I misunderstood Dean's
> comment...
> >>>
> >>> Joe
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> i2rs mailing list
> >>> [email protected]
> >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
> >>>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> i2rs mailing list
> >> [email protected]
> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs

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

Reply via email to