First, let me say I like network modules a lot. I think that middleware concept is nice and provides useful abstractions.
What I struggle with in this draft is the overall value to the SDN controller user. I think I get the use case (but please correct me if I’m wrong). I think the use case is, I have 10 routers that each need the same ACL. I can push that ACL to the controller using the device ietf-access-control-list module. The SDN controller can either pass this data through, directly to the 10 devices (if they support the module natively) or choose how to configure the ACLs (e.g., with CLI) if that’s what the device supports. If that is a correct assessment of the use case, then what if I have another 10 devices that need a different ACL. Why wouldn’t I use the same ietf-access-control-list to the controller? I thought the idea of the controller (and network models) is that they abstract the devices. I don’t need to know what the devices support, nor do I noeed to adjust my approach for different data. Even if the use case is to group devices based on what they support southbound, I don’t know that a new YANG module is needed for that grouping. The controller can simply collect ietf-yang-library details from the devices and maintain its own mapping. Said another way, I don’t see how DMaNM provides the value that a true NM with network-level abstractions would provide. Please provide clue bat as needed. Thanks. Joe
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
