On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 09:24:17AM -0700, Andy Bierman wrote: > > Except that we never use that term. > It is always called operational datastore when we talk about it in meetings. > Hence, the new NMDA terms section: > > ** NMDA Terms > > The following terms are defined in the > Network Management Datastore Architecture > (NMDA) ^I-D.ietf-netmod-revised-datastores^. > and are not redefined here: > > - configuration > - conventional configuration datastore (also called conventional datastore) > - datastore > - operational state > - operational state datastore (also called operational datastore) > > IMO these alternates should be put in the RD draft since they reflect the > terms we actually use. >
I know that we tend to be sloppy in meetings and often in emails but in written RFCs (specifications) I would personally prefer to use a single term. > I think the first sentence refers to the temporary non-NMDA module. > > NEW: > > (a) Modules that require immediate support for the NMDA features > SHOULD be structured for NMDA. A temporary non-NMDA version of these > models SHOULD exist, either an > existing model or a model created either by hand or with > suitable tools that mirror the current modeling strategies. I am not sure about the second SHOULD. I think the temporary non-NMDA version is more a MAY than a SHOULD. /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
