On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 1:40 PM, Robert Wilton <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I've posted a new experimental draft, that proposes a potential different
> solution for handling applied configuration, for possible discussion at
> next week's interim meeting on opstate.
>
> Comments before hand are welcome.
>
>
This is better than the "config" and "state" containers at least.
Multiple schema nodes to represent the same object in different states
doubles the complexity of the module. Considering 97% + of devices
don't need this stuff, that's just not worth 2X the cost.

However, it is important that the schema be stable.
The way an <rpc-reply> is parsed cannot really depend on an <rpc> that
was sent earlier.  But a leaf like <mtu> will either be represented as a
leaf
or as a container in the <rpc-reply>, depending on
the <with-config-state> parameter that was sent in the <rpc>.

I appreciate sec. 7. It is good to relate the solution back to
the requirements (even if that list seems to be growing every week).

I have not personally seen the problems in the requirements list.
The delay between intended and applied is usually milliseconds, sometimes
seconds.
I don't agree that we need to diagnose line cards that are not plugged in.
The operator should figure this out some other way (e.g. entity-mib).

It is not clear how long this data will indicate 'in progress'.
Most of the time, <cfg-intended> and <cfg-actual> will be the same.
(This basically triples the size of a <get-config> response)
I don't see why any enum other than 'diff-cfg-only' would be used.
This is how I would also expect the <get-state> operation to work in Kent's
draft.


It would really help if you included the YANG module you want to
standardize.  There are a couple examples but no formal definition.


Thanks,
> Rob
>


Andy


>
>
> -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: New Version Notification for
> draft-wilton-netmod-opstate-yang-00.txt Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2015 13:31:00
> -0700 From: [email protected] To: Robert Wilton <[email protected]>
> <[email protected]>, Robert Wilton <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
>
> A new version of I-D, draft-wilton-netmod-opstate-yang-00.txt
> has been successfully submitted by Robert Wilton and posted to the
> IETF repository.
>
> Name:         draft-wilton-netmod-opstate-yang
> Revision:     00
> Title:                "With-config-state" Capability for NETCONF/RESTCONF
> Document date:        2015-09-03
> Group:                Individual Submission
> Pages:                22
> URL:            
> https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-wilton-netmod-opstate-yang-00.txt
> Status:         
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-wilton-netmod-opstate-yang/
> Htmlized:       
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wilton-netmod-opstate-yang-00
>
>
> Abstract:
>    This document proposes a possible alternative solution for handling
>    applied configuration state in YANG as described in draft-openconfig-
>    netmod-opstate-01.  The proposed solution, roughly modelled on the
>    with-defaults NETCONF/RESTCONF capability, aims to meet the key
>    requirements set out in draft-openconfig-netmod-opstate-01 without
>    the need for YANG module authors to explicitly duplicate
>    configuration nodes in both configuration and operational containers.
>    This draft does not address the issue of co-location of configuration
>    and operational state for interfaces, nor does it provide a NETCONF
>    mechanism to retrieve operational data separately from configuration
>    data.
>
>
>
>
> 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.
>
> The IETF Secretariat
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>
>
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

Reply via email to