Hi,
This is regarding the question as to whether it should be allowed for a
system to manipulate :
This issue isn't really specific to the NMDA architecture, and there is
no consensus on whether this should be allowed.
Hence, the proposal is that the NMDA architecture draft be completely
On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 1:30 PM, Kent Watsen wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > I agree with Balazs that system-created nodes in running are quite
> common and
>
> > the vendors doing it have no intention of changing it.
>
>
>
> Of course, what else were they going to do pre-NMDA…and
> I agree with Balazs that system-created nodes in running are quite common and
> the vendors doing it have no intention of changing it.
Of course, what else were they going to do pre-NMDA…and also before
require-instance
false? Green-field deployments wouldn't be encumbered with
On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 10:08 AM, Robert Wilton wrote:
>
>
> On 14/09/2017 16:35, Balazs Lengyel wrote:
>
> See below!
> On 2017-09-14 16:32, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
>
> Hi Balazs,
>
> Thanks for your review. Comments inline.
>
> Balazs Lengyel
On 14/09/2017 16:35, Balazs Lengyel wrote:
See below!
On 2017-09-14 16:32, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
Hi Balazs,
Thanks for your review. Comments inline.
Balazs Lengyel wrote:
Hello,
Reading the draft-ietf-netmod-revised-datastores-04 some comments:
General)
See below!
On 2017-09-14 16:32, Martin Bjorklund
wrote:
Hi Balazs,
Thanks for your review. Comments inline.
Balazs Lengyel wrote:
Hello,
Reading the draft-ietf-netmod-revised-datastores-04 some comments: