Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

Original Message - From: "Juergen Schoenwaelder" To: "Martin Bjorklund" Cc: Sent: Monday, November 06, 2017 2:01 PM > On Mon, Nov 06, 2017 at 02:19:24PM +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > > > Trying to summarize

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

Humm. I don't think this is how Chris is envisioning it. We can talk more next week when he presents. Lou On November 6, 2017 12:31:18 PM Robert Wilton wrote: On 06/11/2017 17:24, Lou Berger wrote: On 11/6/2017 12:17 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: What is default

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

On 06/11/2017 17:24, Lou Berger wrote: On 11/6/2017 12:17 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: What is default content of a list? Where is this coming from? Whatever the vendor chooses in their code, and perhaps what gets defined in future model definitions... This is mixing up config and

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

On 11/6/2017 12:17 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > What is default content of a list? Where is this coming from? Whatever the vendor chooses in their code, and perhaps what gets defined in future model definitions... Lou > /js > > On Mon, Nov 06, 2017 at 12:12:30PM -0500, Lou Berger wrote:

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

On 06/11/2017 17:02, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: On Mon, Nov 06, 2017 at 11:48:23AM -0500, Lou Berger wrote: The tags draft has an RPC to 'reset to default state'. I could see wanting the reset to be persistent or not depending on actual usage... In general, I think we love the usage of

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

What is default content of a list? Where is this coming from? /js On Mon, Nov 06, 2017 at 12:12:30PM -0500, Lou Berger wrote: > > What's the standard way to reset a list to a default (based on > implementation)? > > On 11/6/2017 12:02 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 06, 2017

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 5:19 AM, Martin Bjorklund 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,

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

What's the standard way to reset a list to a default (based on implementation)? On 11/6/2017 12:02 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > On Mon, Nov 06, 2017 at 11:48:23AM -0500, Lou Berger wrote: >> The tags draft has an RPC to 'reset to default state'. I could see >> wanting the reset to be

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

On Mon, Nov 06, 2017 at 11:48:23AM -0500, Lou Berger wrote: > > The tags draft has an RPC to 'reset to default state'. I could see > wanting the reset to be persistent or not depending on actual usage... > In general, I think we love the usage of standard operations like edit-config to

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

On 11/06/2017 11:41 AM, Robert Wilton wrote: > > > On 06/11/2017 15:51, Lou Berger wrote: >> >> >> On November 6, 2017 10:21:19 AM Robert Wilton wrote: >> >>> Hi Lou, >>> >>> All of proposed solutions (A through D) allow the action or the RPC to >>> perform whatever behaviour

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

On 06/11/2017 15:51, Lou Berger wrote: On November 6, 2017 10:21:19 AM Robert Wilton wrote: Hi Lou, All of proposed solutions (A through D) allow the action or the RPC to perform whatever behaviour that it wants. This issue is only about which datastore is used to

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

On November 6, 2017 10:21:19 AM Robert Wilton wrote: Hi Lou, All of proposed solutions (A through D) allow the action or the RPC to perform whatever behaviour that it wants. This issue is only about which datastore is used to evaluate and check that the parameters for

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

Hi Lou, All of proposed solutions (A through D) allow the action or the RPC to perform whatever behaviour that it wants. This issue is only about which datastore is used to evaluate and check that the parameters for the action/rpc are valid.  E.g. if the parameters use when, must, leaf-ref,

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

So i guess this comes down to D listed below. While i was expecting C, i think D is probably workable. How would you envision the override would be expressed? Lou On November 6, 2017 9:49:49 AM Martin Bjorklund wrote: Lou Berger wrote: Martin, If I

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

Lou Berger wrote: > 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 The side effects

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

On Mon, Nov 06, 2017 at 02:19:24PM +0100, Martin Bjorklund 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,

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

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

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

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,

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Phil Shafer wrote: > Sorry, if I wasn't clear. I meant the element would > be directly under , so the system knows where to start > looking for data. Guessing is bad. > > Totally agree guessing is bad. Did you see the proposal in a previous

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

Sorry, if I wasn't clear. I meant the element would be directly under , so the system knows where to start looking for data. Guessing is bad. Thanks, Phil Andy Bierman writes: >So a server will be required to guess the correct datastore until it >finds the right one that matches the action

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

On Wed, Nov 01, 2017 at 06:00:15PM +, Alexander Clemm wrote: > > > -Original Message- > ... > > > That is an interesting question. > > > > > > To describe this as a concrete example, if you have a single config > > > true YANG list for dynamic/configuration subscriptions then a > > >

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

ford.edu>; Phil Shafer <p...@juniper.net> Subject: Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements Hi Alex, On 31/10/2017 17:36, Alexander Clemm wrote: Hi Rob, A few comments, inline --- Alex From: netmod [mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Robert Wilton Sent: Tuesday, October 31,

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

> -Original Message- ... > > That is an interesting question. > > > > To describe this as a concrete example, if you have a single config > > true YANG list for dynamic/configuration subscriptions then a > > subscription can be created either via configuration or as an RPC operation. > >

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

Hi, So a server will be required to guess the correct datastore until it finds the right one that matches the action instance? 10 candidate The server will guess the datastore in some

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

On Wed, Nov 01, 2017 at 11:42:43AM +, Robert Wilton wrote: > > > One other comment, it would be good to also indicate that when an RPC > > leads to modification of data nodes, what the “origin” of those > > modifications is. > > > That is an interesting question. > > To describe this as a

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

netmod@ietf.org; Randy Presuhn <randy_pres...@alumni.stanford.edu> *Subject:* Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements Hi, Here is another attempt for proposed text for Actions/RPC statements in NMDA. 6.2 Invocation of RPC Operations This section updates section 7.14 of RFC 7950. RPCs MA

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

On 01/11/2017 06:36, Phil Shafer 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

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

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.

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

Subject: Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements Hi, Here is another attempt for proposed text for Actions/RPC statements in NMDA. 6.2 Invocation of RPC Operations This section updates section 7.14 of RFC 7950. RPCs MAY be defined as affecting the contents of a specific datastore, any c

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 10:22 AM, Randy Presuhn < randy_pres...@alumni.stanford.edu> wrote: > Hi - > > On 10/31/2017 10:14 AM, Andy Bierman wrote: > ... > >> The system side effects are irrelevant, but both the same for rpc and >> action. >> > > Knowing what the system side effects are is

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

Hi - On 10/31/2017 10:14 AM, Andy Bierman wrote: ... The system side effects are irrelevant, but both the same for rpc and action. Knowing what the system side effects are is *ESSENTIAL* if these things are to be of any use operationally. The only issues relevant to YANG are:    -

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 1:33 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > Andy Bierman wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 11:22 AM, Randy Presuhn < > > randy_pres...@alumni.stanford.edu> wrote: > > > > > > > The is not really in a datastore at all. > > It may have

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

On 31/10/2017 15:14, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 02:14:20PM +, Robert Wilton wrote: Is always the right datastore to evaluate RPC input/output data relative to?  For most RPCs this seems to be the right choice by default but it also seems plausible that someone

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 03:35:38PM +, Kent Watsen wrote: > > Hi Robert, > > > 6.2 Invocation of RPC Operations > > > > This section updates section 7.14 of RFC 7950. > > > > RPCs MAY be defined as affecting the contents of a specific datastore, > > any configuration datastore (e.g., ),

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

On 31/10/2017 15:35, Kent Watsen wrote: Hi Robert, 6.2 Invocation of RPC Operations This section updates section 7.14 of RFC 7950. RPCs MAY be defined as affecting the contents of a specific datastore, any configuration datastore (e.g., ), or any datastore (e.g., ).  The RPC definition

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

Hi Robert, > 6.2 Invocation of RPC Operations > > This section updates section 7.14 of RFC 7950. > > RPCs MAY be defined as affecting the contents of a specific datastore, > any configuration datastore (e.g., ), or any datastore > (e.g., ).  The RPC definition specifies how the RPC input >

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 02:14:20PM +, Robert Wilton wrote: > Is always the right datastore to evaluate RPC input/output > data relative to?  For most RPCs this seems to be the right choice by > default but it also seems plausible that someone may wish to define an RPC > that wants to

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

Hi, Here is another attempt for proposed text for Actions/RPC statements in NMDA. 6.2 Invocation of RPC Operations This section updates section 7.14 of RFC 7950. RPCs MAY be defined as affecting the contents of a specific datastore, any configuration datastore (e.g., ), or any datastore

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

Andy Bierman wrote: > On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 11:22 AM, Randy Presuhn < > randy_pres...@alumni.stanford.edu> wrote: > > > Hi - > > > > On 10/26/2017 10:44 AM, Robert Wilton wrote: > > > >> Hi , > >> > >> Separating out the issue regarding which datastore action and RPC apply

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements [was Re: augment YANG 1.0 with YANG 1.1 OK?]

Hi - On 10/26/2017 11:42 AM, Andy Bierman wrote: On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 11:22 AM, Randy Presuhn > wrote: Hi - On 10/26/2017 10:44 AM, Robert Wilton wrote: Hi , Separating out the issue

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements [was Re: augment YANG 1.0 with YANG 1.1 OK?]

On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 11:22 AM, Randy Presuhn < randy_pres...@alumni.stanford.edu> wrote: > Hi - > > On 10/26/2017 10:44 AM, Robert Wilton wrote: > >> Hi , >> >> Separating out the issue regarding which datastore action and RPC apply >> to, we propose the following NEW text to the datastores

Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements [was Re: augment YANG 1.0 with YANG 1.1 OK?]

Hi - On 10/26/2017 10:44 AM, Robert Wilton wrote: Hi , Separating out the issue regarding which datastore action and RPC apply to, we propose the following NEW text to the datastores draft: 6.2 Invocation of Actions and RPC Operations This section updates section 7.15. of RFC 7950.

[netmod] Action and RPC statements [was Re: augment YANG 1.0 with YANG 1.1 OK?]

Hi , Separating out the issue regarding which datastore action and RPC apply to, we propose the following NEW text to the datastores draft: 6.2 Invocation of Actions and RPC Operations This section updates section 7.15. of RFC 7950. In YANG data models, the "action" statement may appear