On 10/15/15 11:45, Susan Hares wrote:
Yes - multiple sub-operation in RESTCONF requires a PATCH, and the burden is
on the client to handle the backing out of data in RESTCONF. You have hit
upon the challenge. The I2RS client is bearing the burden of this back-out
instead of the I2RS agent (Netconf "server" concept).
Do you think this is reasonable to keep the I2RS agents simple? Will it make
the I2RS clients unworkable?
I can't answer an behalf of all I2RS Client implementors, but it doesn't
seem like an undue burden. It's just critical that they understand that
the burden is upon them. How is this decision to be communicated? Will
the architecture be updated?
I assume that Agent implementors _could_ do the other two error handling
techniques if they wanted and advertise this to the Client?
Joe
_______________________________________________
i2rs mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
