On Thu, Mar 05, 2015 at 09:18:02AM +0100, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 03:57:50PM -0800, Andy Bierman wrote: > > > The simple solution is to make "A B C" one atomic edit. > > > > > > > > > We use entity tags and If-Match in RESTCONF so the client can > > be sure it is editing the correct version of the resource instance. > > This works nicely for persistent configuration, especially if > > the server can reboot with the same config ETags. > > > > If-Match will cause the edit to fail if the server reboots and the > > I2RS state is gone. > > The client will get a 412 Precondition Failed response and know it might > > have to > > start over. > > > > RESTCONF only requires the server to maintain an ETag for the config root. > > Finer granularity (e.g., the parent resource has an ETag) is probably needed > > to support multiple concurrent edits. > > > > Thanks, this all makes sense. So there is a viable mechanism to create > a sequence of linked edits. The main trade-off, however, between a > single atomic edit and a sequence of linked edits is who is taking the > pain to cleanup the mess if things fail in the middle. If you write a > client, you love the server to do it. If you write a server, you love > the client to do it. ;-)
It's all pain, but some component has to deal with it. I'm glad that restconf seems to have this situation covered, Andy. Is there a similar mechanism in netconf that I've missed? If so, this completely deals with the need for i2rs to have to ask for anything new. :-) -- Jeff _______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
