RFC 8342 says:

   However,
   <running> MUST always be a valid configuration data tree, as defined
   in Section 8.1 of [RFC7950].

   <intended> is tightly coupled to <running>.  Whenever data is written
   to <running>, the server MUST also immediately update and validate
   <intended>.

   <intended> MAY also be updated independently of <running> if the
   effect of a configuration transformation changes, but <intended> MUST
   always be a valid configuration data tree, as defined in Section 8.1
   of [RFC7950].

   For simple implementations, <running> and <intended> are identical.

/js

On Wed, Nov 07, 2018 at 03:37:57PM +0000, Qin Wu wrote:
> 发件人: netmod [mailto:[email protected]] 代表 Sterne, Jason (Nokia - 
> CA/Ottawa)
> 发送时间: 2018年11月6日 10:56
> 收件人: [email protected]
> 主题: [netmod] some comments on netmod-base-notification-nmda (validation after 
> commit response, etc)
> 
> Hello,
> 
> The draft mentions that "It is possible that some configuration could not be 
> applied to <operational> due to either validation issues, or missing resource 
> etc."
> 
> But wouldn't validation errors cause an error response to the commit RPC? I'm 
> not clear why there would be validation later in the commit/apply process 
> that wasn't part of the decision to reply OK/NOK to the commit.
> 
> 
> [Qin]:The configuration is written into running via commit operation, but 
> commit operation doesn’t equal to validate operation. Validate operation is 
> defined in RFC6241 to validate, e.g., candidate datastore or the <config> 
> element containing the complete configuration in the edit config. But RFC6241 
> doesn’t discuss how validate operation can be applied to intended or other 
> NMDA datastore since NMDA is introduced after RFC6241 gets published.
> 
> 
> 
> As described in RFC8342 and figure 2 of RFC8342
> 
> “Whenever data is written
> 
>    to <running>, the server MUST also immediately update and validate
> 
>    <intended>.
> 
> “
> 
> So validate <intended> takes place after commit operation. It involves in 
> configuration transformations to <running> before intended validation 
> operation.
> 
> The draft also implies that the process of moving config from running -> 
> intended -> operational is decoupled from the application of a candidate -> 
> running.
> - Do systems reply OK/NOK to a commit before config is moved from 
> running->intended->operational ?
> [Qin]: reply OK/NOK indicates whether configuration is written into running 
> but doesn’t tell us whether validation performed on intended is success or 
> failure, validate operation defined in RFC6241 on candidate datastore may be 
> different from Validation operation on intended since it clearly happens at 
> different stage, sure validate operation can be applied to intended, but no 
> standards explicitly specify whether validate operation can be applied to 
> intended.
> This is something we can update in this document.
> 
> - If so, then maybe it isn't correct to have a username in the notifications. 
> A specific user/session did the commit, but then if the commit process ends 
> after candidate->running (i.e. the reply happens at that point), then isn't 
> it really the system moving the config from running->intended->operational?
> [Qin]: See above.
> Jason

> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod


-- 
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

Reply via email to