Hi, "maqiufang \(A\)" <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, all > > There is still another issue which is about origin metadata > annotation: should the origin="system" be required for system > configurations copied/pasted into <running>?
I think the question is "if a node is present both in <intended> and in <system>, which origin does it have in <operational>"? (NOTE: it doesn't matter if the value was "copy & pasted" from <system> or entered in some other way.) Obviously, if a leaf node is present in both, but its value differ, the origin must indicate which datastore had precedence. But suppose the node is a list entry (e.g., an interface) or a leaf with the same value. In this case, it is not clear which origin should be used. I think it would be ok to use "system" in this case. (But also perhaps it doesn't matter much). > Currently any system configuration explicitly declared in <running> in > order to configure its descendant nodes or maintain <running> > offline-valid will show up in <operational> with origin=intended. > The question behind this issue is whether we want a copied/pasted > system defined data node to override and take precedence over > <system>. > > The choices and some considerations of this issue received so far: > o Origin=system IS required for system configuration copied/pasted > into <running> > ? I believe that "system" reflects the most accurate source in this > case. And only in this way, a server can allow a read-only system > configuration to be declared in <running>(e.g., in order to valid > <running>) by the clients. What do you mean with "a read-only system configuration [...] be declared in <running>"? <system> is a separate datastore that clients can read, right? /martin > ? The challenge for this choice is on the server side. It MUST be > able to recognize a particular data node which explicitly defined in > <running> is actually a mirror of what is in <system>. > o Origin=system is NOT required for system configuration copied/pasted > into <running> > ? Good consistency. For all configurations explicitly defined in > <running>, if they appear in <operational>, the origin value is > "intended" with no exceptions. > o Define a system-mode which is similar to with-defaults basic mode > and allow a server to advertise a particular behavior > ? Does it mean we could get the Pros from both choices? > Any other thoughts? _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
