On Mon, Dec 01, 2014 at 05:15:08PM +0000, Fedyk, Don wrote: > > From: Martin Bjorklund [mailto:[email protected]] > > Another way of stating this is that NETCONF commit semantics don't matter if > > I2RS defines a new ephemeral datastore. (Modulo interactions with the > > config > > datastore). > > > > > > /martin > [Don] I agree. We need to define semantics for the datastore and predictable > results for the writable running state or active configuration. It seems to > me if there is priorities and overlap with various datastores there should be > blocking or overriding of ephemeral data too.
Interactions with things outside of the ephemeral config has been the difficult thing for this discussion all along. While I'm happy that people seem to be thinking harder about the protocol details, I'm not sure I've heard anything convincing that we know what that means yet. (Although I do find the edata comment from Andy for Restconf to be promising...) -- Jeff _______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
