Hi, very interesting comments...
I agree these are requirements that could apply to more than I2RS. The first-one-wins (via client priority) details could apply to configuration as well as ephemeral state, and I wonder if NETCONF should be changed to support it. I don't agree that a lost connection caused all the state for that client to disappear. In NETCONF, it is generally only the edits in progress that are tossed. Since I2RS will not use a candidate config, these multi-PDU edits should not be possible in I2RS. I agree that the "access" procedures for ephemeral state can be separated from "multi-head" procedures, but they are somewhat coupled. I think the arch. doc mentioned parameters sent with an edit to ask for a notification if the edit is rejected because higher priority data already exists (notify me when my edit might work). It seems multi-head control is mandatory to support. Andy On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 3:01 PM, Linda Dunbar <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Sue and Jeff, > > > > There have been many postings/comments to > draft-ietf-i2rs-ephemeral-state-00, I went through many, but not all. In > case my comments have been addressed by previous postings that I missed, I > am really sorry for wasting your time. > > > > > > I find the majority of the content in draft-ietf-i2rs-ephemeral-state-00 > is about the “multi-headed control of a I2RS agent”. > > > > IMHO, the “I2RS-ephemeral-state” should be addressed separately from > “multi-headed control”, because for networks that only use single > controller, they don’t have to deal with the complicated scheme of multiple > controllers, but they do need to conform to the “ephemeral-state” via I2RS > interface. > > > > “I2RS-ephemeral-state” should be simply: > > - all commands from I2RS interface are ephemeral, i.e. they do not sustain > restart, and all configuration from I2RS interface are voided (or removed) > when the connection to the I2RS agent is lost. > > > > > > The Multi-headed control scheme described in the draft can also be applied > to persistent configuration. > > > > > > draft-ietf-i2rs-ephemeral-state-00 introduced a new “ephemeral-config” to > NETCONF, does it mean that if I2RS client uses regular “config” instead of > “ephemeral-config”, the configuration becomes persistent? It shouldn’t, > in my opinion. > > > > > > Linda Dunbar > > > > _______________________________________________ > i2rs mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs > >
_______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
