Re: [netmod] Last Call: (Network Management Datastore Architecture) to Proposed Standard two

Hi Tom, "tom p." wrote: > Much of this I-D is about the idea that network management data objects > can often take two different values. The I-D always refers to this as > being two values but is that a limit that this architecture imposes; or > can it be more? The I-D

Re: [netmod] Last Call: (Network Management Datastore Architecture) to Proposed Standard configuration

Hi Tom, The draft uses this definition for configuration: o configuration: Data that is required to get a device from its initial default state into a desired operational state. This data is modeled in YANG using "config true" nodes. Configuration can originate from

Re: [netmod] AD review: draft-ietf-netmod-revised-datastores-08

On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 3:28 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > Robert Wilton wrote: > > Hi Andy, > > > > > > On 08/01/2018 19:45, Andy Bierman wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 5:55 AM, Robert Wilton > >

Re: [netmod] Last Call: (Network Management Datastore Architecture) to Proposed Standard two

Much of this I-D is about the idea that network management data objects can often take two different values. The I-D always refers to this as being two values but is that a limit that this architecture imposes; or can it be more? The later diagrams show three datastores, , and . Since " MAY

Re: [netmod] Last Call: (Network Management Datastore Architecture) to Proposed Standard configuration

This I-D re-arranges the tectonic plates which underly the IETF's management technology and is likely to affect all such work for some years to come. As such, I want it to be clear and unambiguous but do not find it so. I find it unclear as to the meaning of the word 'configuration'. Netconf

Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-entity-06

Hi Martin, We had a discussion on this and we have some concerns about below statement (behavior in the description statement): >This leaf can be configured. The configured value is used only if >the server cannot determine the vendor-specific serial number from >the component

Re: [netmod] Netmod ACL - Can "access-lists" be set up as a "grouping"

Hi, > On Jan 8, 2018, at 7:45 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > Hi, > > Robert Wilton wrote: >> Hi Einar, Jon, Mahesh, >> >> My gut instinct is that making this a grouping might not be a good >> idea: >> >> 1) If somebody updates the core ACL model, will

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-14

I have pulled in the changes as they relate to: - moving “interface-acl” under the container “attachment-points” making it local to that container. - reverting “acl-type” to “type” - removed “interface-all-aggregate” feature - simplified source port and destination port definition The pull

[netmod] Alvaro Retana's No Objection on draft-ietf-netmod-revised-datastores-09: (with COMMENT)

Alvaro Retana has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-netmod-revised-datastores-09: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.)

Re: [netmod] AD review: draft-ietf-netmod-revised-datastores-08

Hi Andy, On 08/01/2018 19:45, Andy Bierman wrote: On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 5:55 AM, Robert Wilton > wrote: Hi Andy, Regarding your comment below, this intent is captured by this text describing the operational datastore in section

Re: [netmod] AD review: draft-ietf-netmod-revised-datastores-08

Robert Wilton wrote: > Hi Andy, > > > On 08/01/2018 19:45, Andy Bierman wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 5:55 AM, Robert Wilton > > wrote: > > > > Hi Andy, > > > > Regarding your comment below, this intent is

[netmod] Alexey Melnikov's Yes on draft-ietf-netmod-revised-datastores-09: (with COMMENT)

Alexey Melnikov has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-netmod-revised-datastores-09: Yes When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer

[netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-rfc7223bis-02.txt

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Network Modeling WG of the IETF. Title : A YANG Data Model for Interface Management Author : Martin Bjorklund Filename:

[netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-rfc7277bis-02.txt

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Network Modeling WG of the IETF. Title : A YANG Data Model for IP Management Author : Martin Bjorklund Filename:

Re: [netmod] Kathleen Moriarty's Discuss on draft-ietf-netmod-rfc7223bis-01: (with DISCUSS)

Sent from my mobile device > On Jan 9, 2018, at 2:26 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > Hi, > > Kathleen Moriarty wrote: >> -- >> DISCUSS: >>

[netmod] Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-netmod-revised-datastores-09

Reviewer: Jan Lindblad Review result: Ready Finally the NMDA datastores draft has reached WGLC, and I have been assigned as YD reviewer; quite an honor ;-) Because of the pretty fundamental importance of this document, I performed what I consider myself a pretty thorough review. Since this work

Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-entity-06

Hi, "Bogaert, Bart (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)" wrote: > Hi Martin, > > We had a discussion on this and we have some concerns about below > statement (behavior in the description statement): > > >This leaf can be configured. The configured value is used only if > >the

Re: [netmod] Yangdoctors last call review of draft-ietf-netmod-entity-07

Hi Martin, you are right, now I see it. So, to me, the document is Ready. Andy, text in RFC6087bis (Temporary non-NMDA Modules) should be changed since it seems to limit the temporary module to contain data nodes only. OLD     It contains the top-level config=false data nodes that would have

Re: [netmod] AD review: draft-ietf-netmod-revised-datastores-08

On 09/01/2018 11:28, Martin Bjorklund wrote: Robert Wilton wrote: Hi Andy, On 08/01/2018 19:45, Andy Bierman wrote: On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 5:55 AM, Robert Wilton > wrote: Hi Andy, Regarding your comment below,

Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-14

Hi Mahesh, Thanks for this work.  I think this is okay.  In the case of MUD we simply won't have the other container.  Can I please ask that you get the draft out quickly as draft-ietf-opsawg-mud has been waiting quite some time for this work to complete. Eliot On 10.01.18 04:08, Mahesh