Re: [netmod] some comments on revised-datastores-01

Thank you for letting me know. Sue -Original Message- From: Kent Watsen [mailto:kwat...@juniper.net] Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2017 12:18 PM To: Susan Hares; 'Juergen Schoenwaelder' Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] some comments on revised-datastores-01 Sue, I think

Re: [netmod] some comments on revised-datastores-01

understand. Sue -Original Message- From: netmod [mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Kent Watsen Sent: Monday, March 20, 2017 1:09 PM To: Juergen Schoenwaelder Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] some comments on revised-datastores-01 > I believe this is the wrong di

Re: [netmod] some comments on revised-datastores-01

+1 to Juergen's point on a separate module list. Sue -Original Message- From: netmod [mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Juergen Schoenwaelder Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2017 2:17 PM To: Kent Watsen Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] some comments on revised-datastores-01

Re: [netmod] some comments on revised-datastores-01

Hi, Not sure I like the YANG module with all the datastore identities because it makes datastore discovery more complicated. I prefer the server advertise capabilities in the message. More importantly, all the existing NETCONF operations use a container with a choice in it to select the source

Re: [netmod] some comments on revised-datastores-01

> I believe this is the wrong direction, even if we rewrite the module > in the revised datastores document and split it into multiple modules. > A simple list of implemented datastores is cheap. It is flexible. It > does not require explanations and rules how definitions must be split > into

Re: [netmod] some comments on revised-datastores-01

On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 02:28:53PM +, Kent Watsen wrote: > > > But this logic is already broken for the datastores defined in the > > revised datastores document. It defines an identity for startup but > > not all systems implement startup. End of proof. > > Ha ha, yes professor. But recall

Re: [netmod] some comments on revised-datastores-01

> But this logic is already broken for the datastores defined in the > revised datastores document. It defines an identity for startup but > not all systems implement startup. End of proof. Ha ha, yes professor. But recall this started as a discussion regarding what to do for the new dynamic

Re: [netmod] some comments on revised-datastores-01

On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 02:05:09PM +, Kent Watsen wrote: > > Why are you mentioning identities here? Yes, the module defines > identities, but that is beside the point to what I'm saying. I'm > only discussing the module (e.g. ietf-i2rs-solution) showing up > in YANG Library and using the

Re: [netmod] some comments on revised-datastores-01

>> It seems okay for more than one datastore to be represented by a single >> module. Presumably the set of them come together as a package (all or >> none), right? This could be a datastore-designer decision to make. >> >> For instance, I2RS talks about priority-ordered planes of glass, so

Re: [netmod] some comments on revised-datastores-01

On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 07:49:05PM +, Kent Watsen wrote: > > > Obviously, relying on module names does not work if a module defines > > multiple datastores. So either the set of datastores is identified > > from reading the whole yang-library list or we provide a separate list > > (and I

Re: [netmod] some comments on revised-datastores-01

> Obviously, relying on module names does not work if a module defines > multiple datastores. So either the set of datastores is identified > from reading the whole yang-library list or we provide a separate list > (and I think we should provide a separate list). It seems okay for more than one

Re: [netmod] some comments on revised-datastores-01

On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 06:11:35PM +, Kent Watsen wrote: > > Wait, I think you're mixing things up. I'm not talking about using YANG > Library to identify which datastores a module can be accessed in, so much as > knowing which datastores are implemented in the first place. > > For

Re: [netmod] some comments on revised-datastores-01

>> The new dynamic datastores are (per this draft) advertised by being >> listed in YANG Library. Only the "built in" datastores wouldn't have >> a module-backing. > > Actually, in the current draft, each module has a leaf-list of all > datastores (not only dynamic) where the module is

Re: [netmod] some comments on revised-datastores-01

Kent Watsen wrote: > > > > > Currently there is no explicit mechanism for a server to > > advertise which datastores is supports, other that the advertisment of > > features in "ietf-datastore". Maybe we should add an explicit list of > > supported datastores (but this

Re: [netmod] some comments on revised-datastores-01

> Currently there is no explicit mechanism for a server to > advertise which datastores is supports, other that the advertisment of > features in "ietf-datastore". Maybe we should add an explicit list of > supported datastores (but this will be protocol-dependent, since some > protocols might

Re: [netmod] some comments on revised-datastores-01

Andy Bierman wrote: > Hi, > > I like this draft -- even more than I like datastores. > Looks like some thought went into the terminology section. > > One minor concern: > > sec. 4.1: > >On a traditional NETCONF implementation, and are >always the same. > > >