> On 28 Dec 2015, at 15:24, Juergen Schoenwaelder 
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 10:05:46PM +0000, Robert Wilton wrote:
>> 
>> Personally, ignoring all the backwards compatibility issues, I would 
>> prefer that interfaces and interfaces-state were a combined single list 
>> (as proposed by OpenConfig).  E.g. something along the lines of:
>> - the system can still provide an operational list of discovered 
>> interfaces so that clients can know what is there.
>> - but management agents would be expected to explicitly configure 
>> (i.e. create an entry for) all interfaces for which it wanted to 
>> retrieve data for.
>> 
> 
> A clear separation of config from operational state is one of the
> outcomes of the IAB workshop documented in RFC 3535 and it is one of
> the key foundations of both NETCONF and YANG. Config and operational
> state have different and _independent_ lifetimes - you can have config
> for resources that are not present and you can have operational state
> for resources that are present but not configured. In addition, the
> data models for operational state are often not the same as the data
> models for configuration. Merging all things back into a single list
> with a single keying (naming) structure gets us back into the mess we
> were in with SNMP.

I agree. A good example is in ietf-routing: static routes are part of 
configuration but in state data they only appear in RIBs together with protocol 
originated-routes - there is no representation of static routes per se in state 
data. Data models for configuration and state data can indeed be rather 
different.

I would also add that IMO state data can in general be expected less 
standardised than configuration because they often need to be closer to the 
underlying device implementation.

Lada

> 
> /js
> 
> -- 
> Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
> Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
> Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C




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

Reply via email to