> Currently there is no explicit mechanism for a server to
> advertise which datastores is supports, other that the advertisment of
> features in "ietf-datastore". Maybe we should add an explicit list of
> supported datastores (but this will be protocol-dependent, since some
> protocols might not expose all datastores).
The new dynamic datastores are (per this draft) advertised by being listed in
YANG Library. Only the "built in" datastores wouldn't have a module-backing.
This is okay for the most part today as NETCONF has its capabilities and
RESTCONF has its unified datastore, but it does leave <intended> hanging in the
wind.
Formally defining the built-in datastores as you suggest, using a module to
define their presence, would be nice from a consistency perspective.
K.
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
