Re: [i2rs] Kathleen Moriarty's No Objection on draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l3-topology-08: (with COMMENT)

[Alia Atlas <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Lou Berger <[e-mail]> wrote:

>
>
> On 2/1/2017 2:32 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 01:52:25PM -0500, Lou Berger wrote:
> >> Juergen,
> >>
> >>     What precludes treating such dependencies in the same way
> >> per-provisioning is handled by RFC7223?
> >>
> > This is fine. But having direct dependencies, e.g., leafrefs from
> > config true leafs to config false leafs, is not.
> >
> > /js
> >
>
> Okay, then we're on the same page -- I think some may have missed the
> possibility of handling references to dynamic topology information in
> config using a 'pre-provisioning' approach.
>

I would be happy to see Alex, Xufeng, Kent & Pavan articulate what this
would
look like and how it would work for the base topology model, so that the WG
can
consider all potentially viable options.  I'm not certain how it would
function for the
recursive nature and it does presume the separate /config and /oper-state
trees in
the data-model that were a concern (though certainly the current
recommended
approach for YANG models).

Regards,
Alia