On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 10:13:40AM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > > The revised-datastores draft changes the semantics of "configuration data" - > for example, the definition from RFC 6241 clearly won't apply to the > "running" datastore in the new datastore model.
Why would that be the case? > So a new definition of configuration data will probably be needed, and this > implicitly changes the semantics of the "config" statement. > YANG defines the config statement as follows: The "config" statement takes as an argument the string "true" or "false". If "config" is "true", the definition represents configuration. Data nodes representing configuration are part of configuration datastores. I do not think it is the intend of the revised datastore model as written down in the I-D to change this. > BTW, we use rw/ro in tree diagrams. Which is a mis-nomer (tree diagrams were inherited from the SNMP world and somehow the rw/ro distinction was kept even though it is technically wrong). There are more details here, I will start a separate thread for this. Note that the diagrams in the revised datastore ID make a clear distinction between ct/cf and rw/ro. In particular, the ID notes that ct object may be rw in one datastore but ro in a different datastore. /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
