Re: [netmod] opstate-reqs #3: Is there a requirement for asynchronous systems to provide a blocking config update?

Hi all, There is some discussion below about the difference between perfectly async (reply to the as soon as possible) vs hybrid. Isn't there some value in being hybrid if the additional delay to reply is reasonably bounded (i.e. less than a few seconds 95% of the time) while adding some valu

[netmod] netmod-opstate-reqs and error option terms (rollback on error)

Hi all, The term "rollback on error" (and other error options) has been used during these discussions around the opstate requirements. That term already has some meaning in RFC6241 (or at least rollback-on-error does and that is pretty close) and IMO it (today) has nothing to do with "applied"

Re: [netmod] leaf-list uniqueness requirement for non-config nodes

Hi - >From: Juergen Schoenwaelder >Sent: Oct 29, 2015 1:06 AM >To: netmod@ietf.org >Subject: [netmod] leaf-list uniqueness requirement for non-config nodes > >Hi, > >RFC 6020 say: > > The values in a leaf-list MUST be unique. > >While this may have a justification for config true nodes (to allo

Re: [netmod] if-feature and default

On Sun, Nov 1, 2015 at 4:48 PM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > > > On 02 Nov 2015, at 09:40, Andy Bierman wrote: > > > > > > > > On Sun, Nov 1, 2015 at 4:20 PM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > > > > > On 02 Nov 2015, at 02:16, Andy Bierman wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > I started a separate thread for

Re: [netmod] config lists without keys (Y09) / non-unique leaf-lists (Y57)

On Sun, Nov 1, 2015 at 8:46 PM, Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang wrote: > Hi, > > Earlier today Mach and I were asking Lada if we could have a config list > w/o keys for our use case and he pointed us to this thread. > > This is exactly what we need. For some lists we don't need to operate on > individual

Re: [netmod] config lists without keys (Y09) / non-unique leaf-lists (Y57)

Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 09:03:46AM +0900, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > > > On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 01:17:56PM +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > > > Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > the issues Y09 and Y57

Re: [netmod] config lists without keys (Y09) / non-unique leaf-lists (Y57)

On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 09:03:46AM +0900, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 01:17:56PM +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > > Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > the issues Y09 and Y57 were declared dead after intense discussion

Re: [netmod] Tunnel Design Philosophy

Hi, Zhenbin: >From my opinion, if the Yang Model can’t be organized from top to down, from common to specific, then it will be very difficult for service provider to adopt them within their network. The reason to adopt the Yang Model for service provider is to accelerate the deployment of vario