Martin,
If I have an RPC or action that changes state, how would the persistence of
that state be indicated with an NMBA data stores. I expected it to be
related to the data store, but I read your mail below as saying otherwise
Thanks,
Lou
On November 6, 2017 8:20:12 AM Martin Bjorklund <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi,
Trying to summarize this issue.
The problem is which datastore is used to:
1a. evaluate action ancestor nodes
1b. evaluate action input/output parameter leafref,
instance-identifier, must, when
2. evaluate rpc input/output parameter leafref,
instance-identifier, must, when
(Note that the side effects of an action/rpc is not part of this
issue)
I think it would be very weird if 1a and 1b were treated differently,
so I just label them as 1 below.
Possible solutions:
A. Always use <operational> for 1 and 2.
(This is what the current nmda draft says).
B. Let the client specify the datastore for 1, and use <operational>
for 2.
(Note that this is trivial in RESTCONF (since the datastore is
part of the URL), but would require a new parameter for NETCONF
(or a new <action2>).
C. Let the client specify the datastore for 1 and 2.
This would require a new generic parameter for how RPCs are
invoked in both NETCONF and RESTCONF.
D. Like B, but let the description of the "rpc" statement optionally
override this.
I prefer B and then D.
/martin
Andy Bierman <[email protected]> wrote:
On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Phil Shafer <[email protected]> wrote:
> Sorry, if I wasn't clear. I meant the <datastore> element would
> be directly under <action>, so the system knows where to start
> looking for data. Guessing is bad.
>
>
Totally agree guessing is bad.
Did you see the <action2> proposal in a previous email?
That is exactly what I proposed, except I do not want to
overload <action> so the new template would be a different name.
I realize the expanded name of the datastore element prevents it from
being confused with top-level YANG nodes, but the conformance
is more clear with a new name.
> Thanks,
> Phil
>
Andy
>
>
> Andy Bierman writes:
> >So a server will be required to guess the correct datastore until it
> >finds the right one that matches the action instance?
> >
> > <action>
> > <top>
> > <list1>
> > <key>10</key>
> > <do-test>
> > <datastore>candidate</datastore>
> > </do-test>
> > </list1>
> > </top>
> > </action>
> >
> >The server will guess the datastore in some proprietary order and parse
> >instances of /top/ and /top/list1. Then it finds the <do-test> action
> >and parses the input to get to the datastore and find out the real
> datastore
> >to use. If the server guessed wrong, then it reparses the <action>
> against
> >the requested datastore. Hopefully the schema trees match up.
> >
> >Will vendors do all the extra work required to support this sort of thing?
> >I doubt it.
> >
> >
> >Andy
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 11:36 PM, Phil Shafer <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> Robert Wilton writes:
> >> >ii) However, as far as I can see, it doesn't make sense for an action
> to
> >> >directly affect the contents of any configuration datastore, that
> should
> >> >be done via a purpose built rpc (like edit-config).
> >>
> >> An example action would be to retrieve the fingerprint of an ssh
> >> key. I might want to get the fingerprint of a key in <candidate>
> >> before I commit it.
> >>
> >> Or I could have an action that sets the SNMPv3 auth key to a random
> >> value, and I want to invoke that action against <candidate>.
> >>
> >> Seems like <startup> might also be an interesting place to target
> >> actions, but I can't think of a good example.
> >>
> >> There are always scenarios where something is useful, and the problem
> >> with ruling it out is that it becomes needed at some later point.
> >> We've a habit of ruling out things and later wishing we had them.
> >>
> >> Is the easy fix to just put a datastore leaf under rpc/action and
> >> have it default to operational? Any specific RPC can define its
> >> own datastore leaf of hard-code the database in the description
> >> (explicitly or implicitly <operational>), but the <action> RPC only
> >> gets this if we make a new parameter for it.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Phil
> >>
> >
> >--001a11411b0ad2d58d055cee96cb
> >Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
> >Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> >
> ><div dir=3D"ltr">Hi,<div><br></div><div>So a server will be required to
> gue=
> >ss the correct datastore until it</div><div>finds the right one that
> matche=
> >s the action instance?</div><div><br></div><div>=C2=A0
> =C2=A0<action>=
> ></div><div>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0<top></div><div>=C2=A0
> =C2=A0 =
> >=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 <list1></div><div>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =
> >=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0<key>10</key></div><div>=C2=A0 =C2=A0
> =C2=
> >=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0<do-test></div><div>=C2=A0 =C2=A0
> =C2=
> >=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 <datastore>candidate<
> /datas=
> >tore></div><div>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0
> =C2=A0</do-=
> >test></div><div>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0
> </list1></div><=
> >div>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 </top></div><div>=C2=A0 =C2=A0
> </a=
> >ction></div><div><br></div><div>The server will guess the datastore
> in s=
> >ome proprietary order and parse</div><div>instances of /top/ and
> /top/list1=
> >.=C2=A0 Then it finds the <do-test> action</div><div>and parses the
> i=
> >nput to get to the datastore and find out the real datastore</div><div>to
> u=
> >se.=C2=A0 If the server guessed wrong, then it reparses the
> <action> =
> >against</div><div>the requested datastore.=C2=A0 Hopefully the schema
> trees=
> > match up.</div><div><br></div><div>Will vendors do all the extra work
> requ=
> >ired to support this sort of thing?</div><div>I doubt
> it.</div><div><br></d=
> >iv><div><br></div><div>Andy</div><div><br></div><div><br></
> div><div><br></d=
> >iv><div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Tue,
> O=
> >ct 31, 2017 at 11:36 PM, Phil Shafer <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a
> href=3D"mailt=
> >o:[email protected]" target=3D"_blank">[email protected]</a>></span>
> wrote=
> >:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0
> .8ex;border-le=
> >ft:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Robert Wilton writes:<br>
> >>ii) However, as far as I can see, it doesn't make sense for an
> acti=
> >on to<br>
> >>directly affect the contents of any configuration datastore, that
> shoul=
> >d<br>
> >>be done via a purpose built rpc (like edit-config).<br>
> ><br>
> >An example action would be to retrieve the=C2=A0 fingerprint of an ssh<br>
> >key.=C2=A0 I might want to get the fingerprint of a key in
> <candidate>=
> >;<br>
> >before I commit it.<br>
> ><br>
> >Or I could have an action that sets the SNMPv3 auth key to a random<br>
> >value, and I want to invoke that action against <candidate>.<br>
> ><br>
> >Seems like <startup> might also be an interesting place to
> target<br>
> >actions, but I can't think of a good example.<br>
> ><br>
> >There are always scenarios where something is useful, and the problem<br>
> >with ruling it out is that it becomes needed at some later point.<br>
> >We've a habit of ruling out things and later wishing we had them.<br>
> ><br>
> >Is the easy fix to just put a datastore leaf under rpc/action and<br>
> >have it default to operational?=C2=A0 Any specific RPC can define its<br>
> >own datastore leaf of hard-code the database in the description<br>
> >(explicitly or implicitly <operational>), but the <action>
> RPC =
> >only<br>
> >gets this if we make a new parameter for it.<br>
> ><br>
> >Thanks,<br>
> >=C2=A0Phil<br>
> ></blockquote></div><br></div></div></div>
> >
> >--001a11411b0ad2d58d055cee96cb--
>
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
