Andy,

On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 06:04:15PM -0700, Andy Bierman wrote:
> OK -- it is becoming clearer now -- in order to support a broker, the
> priority is saved with the node, not the client.

FWIW, I think this is likely the case.  However, the architecture authors
seem to disagree.

> The operator configured priority is really the "best allowed".
> Let's say lower priorities are better, and client A is assigned the
> value 10.  That means client A is allowed to use priorities 10 .. 255.

The implication from the architecture seems to be that a client gets one
priority.  This is the point for Alia/Joel to chime in if they disagree with
my interpretation.

> Each edit from client A can have a priority that is associated with
> the secondary client.
> 
>    <rpc>
>       <edit-config>
>          <target><ephemeral /></target>
>          <config>  ... </config>
>          <secondary-identity>app27</secondary-identity>
>          <priority>42</priority>
>       </edit-config>
>    </rpc>

I don't believe the expected behavior is that priority is carried as a
protocol parameter.  FWIW, I think this may be useful in the case of a proxy
(as above), but presents interesting security issues since the secondary
identity isn't part of the authentication system.  

-- Jeff

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

Reply via email to