> .... > Who needs all this to manage a network? > > I sometimes get comments from people about NETCONF defaults, like "You think this is a standard? Why does a vendor get to decide what is a default leaf?"
CoMI has taken a different approach. Every server MUST implement "trim" mode and nothing else. NETCONF should do the same (but won't) Andy > > This draft makes with-defaults mandatory-to-implement. > > It is a SHOULD implement now. (I approve!). > > > > The with-defaults capability MUST be advertised by the NMDA server, > > including > > the basic-mode parameter. The also-supported parameter MAY be included. > > > > Is it possible for report-all-tagged to apply to nodes that are learned > > (i.e., not origin=default)? > > So here is an alternate proposal: The NMDA documents are silent about > with-defaults and if someone wants to use with-defaults with > datastores then an update of RFC 6243 needs to be written. This way, > implementations can choose to not do any of the with-defaults magic. > > What we may consider, though, is to have a way to negate origin-filter > so that we can exclude specific origins - right now to emulate this > one has to (a) know all possible origins and then (b) list all origins > except the one not wanted. > > /js > > -- > Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH > Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany > Fax: +49 421 200 3103 <https://www.jacobs-university.de/> >
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
