> On 19 Dec 2016, at 12:31, Jan Lindblad <[email protected]> wrote: > >> But once you only have machines programming the config, then they should be >> able to easily construct a single message for each edit of the config (which >> can be applied/failed in its entirety). Candidate and locking don't seem to >> help here. >> >> Further, if you want to update multiple devices at the same time then you >> end up in the realm of distributed transactions which get very complicated >> and are hard to get right in a fully robust fashion. > > Harder still without the candidate. Any case where transaction phases or > timing is involved would be harder to get right without the candidate and > confirmed commit. Being far from perfect, it's the best standardized > configuration protocol out there.
Per-user candidate datastores are much easier to deal with, and this is what we do in our RESTCONF implementation: https://github.com/CZ-NIC/jetconf Lada > > /jan > -- Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
