If no ephemeral model can include any information which is config=true
in a YANG model, I believe that would be a show-stopper for I2RS> There
are many pieces of information I2RS needs to manipulate in an ephemeral
fashion which are,as I understand it, config=true.
Yours,
Joel
On 6/23/15 3:05 PM, Andy Bierman wrote:
Hi,
I am still fairly confused how the running configuration interacts
with ephemeral data, but I will wait to see some concrete solution
proposals.
The proposal does not mention what changes would be required to
YANG to add "config=ephermal". There are 1000s of lines
of text that would be impacted by this change. This change
might break a YANG 1.0 tool, which would violate the NETMOD charter
for YANG 1.1.
This solution does seem to suggest that I2RS can never alter any
value that is config=true. These nodes can only be changed by NETCONF.
This of course means that no client priority or secondary identity
could be supported for config=true nodes. Ephemeral data cannot
really rely on any local config, since any client can alter it at any time.
This might be fine, but I2RS clients need to be careful not to
assume any particular running configuration in order to work.
You cannot safely add an ephemeral leaf to a configuration container
or list.
It also means that I2RS can never be used to override a config=true
value (since the data models do not overlap). A special add-on I2RS
module would be needed to define the specific I2RS override knobs.
sec 6.2 adds client priority to the NACM group list.
Users can be in multiple groups, so you need to specify how
the client priority is determined as the group membership
configuration is changed.
+--rw groups
| +--rw group [name]
| +--rw name group-name-type
| +--rw user-name* user-name-type
| +--rw i2rs:i2rs-priority i2rs-priority-type
Sec 6.3. shows the client setting its own priority.
This does not seem correct if the administrator is supposed to
set the client priorities.
<foo xmlns:i2rs="https://ietf.example.com/i2rs";
i2rs:i2rs-secondary-identity="user1" i2rs:i2rs-priority="47">
...
</foo>
Andy
On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Susan Hares <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Andy: ____
__ __
Thank you for the feedback on
draft-ietf-i2rs-pehemeral-state-00.txt. This document is now a WG
document – so suggestions on changing the text are welcome. It is
a work-in-progress so I appreciate your help in refining this
draft. Please suggest alternate text for the draft. My comments on
individual points are below. ____
__ __
At the front of this document are the top 10 requirements for the
I2RS protocol. All other details within this draft are to provide
more detail to these requirements, and do not dictate a solution to
the NETCONF/NETMOD working group. I hope my message to
netconf/netmod/I2rs further clarifies this point.____
__ __
The I2RS 6/24/2015 interim will continue to discuss the I2RS
requirement on web-ex. Please join us at the interim and continue
to discuss the requirements on this mail list. ____
__ __
Sue Hares ____
__ __
*From:*i2rs [mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>] *On Behalf Of *Andy Bierman
*Sent:* Tuesday, June 23, 2015 2:09 PM
*To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Cc:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>; [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:* Re: [i2rs] I-D Action:
draft-ietf-i2rs-ephemeral-state-00.txt____
__ __
Hi,____
__ __
This draft seems to propose very specific solutions, not
requirements.____
__ __
__ __
This text is in the section explaining why an ephemeral datastore
won't work:____
__ __
The most obvious disadvantage of such a fully separate datastore
is____
that interaction with the network element's operational or____
configuration state becomes significantly more difficult.____
__ __
I don't see any evidence or examples in the draft to support this
claim.____
__ __
__ __
[Sue: This is correct. The authors recorded what they heard at the
I2RS interims. If you would like to clarify this – please do. I
have heard this is implementation dependent. Is this true? ____
__ __
The requirements do not make it clear how a YANG module is
implemented____
by I2RS vs. implemented by NETCONF or RESTCONF. It is not clear at
all____
how YANG data-def-stmts are handled correctly by each protocol.____
Perhaps you can provide some data model examples.____
__ __
[Sue: I have given the I2RS yang module list in the netconf
announcement for the I2RS RIB, I2RS Topology drafts, and I2RS FB
RIB. These data modules provide you with some examples, and I
welcome a specific discussion of these modules on the list or at the
I2RS interim. ____
____
Andy____
__ __
__ __
__ __
On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 9:52 AM, <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:____
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
directories.
This draft is a work item of the Interface to the Routing System
Working Group of the IETF.
Title : I2RS Ephemeral State Requirements
Authors : Jeff Haas
Susan Hares
Filename : draft-ietf-i2rs-ephemeral-state-00.txt
Pages : 13
Date : 2015-06-23
Abstract:
This document covers requests to the netmod and netconf Working
Groups for functionality to support the ephemeral state requirements
to implement the I2RS architecture.
The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-i2rs-ephemeral-state/
There's also a htmlized version available at:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-i2rs-ephemeral-state-00
Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of
submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org
<http://tools.ietf.org>.
Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
_______________________________________________
i2rs mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[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
