Re: [i2rs] Question on opstate/ephemeral update

"Susan Hares" <> Wed, 16 November 2016 21:13 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E7861294DA for <>; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 13:13:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.945
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.945 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DOS_OUTLOOK_TO_MX=2.845] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wa44BmAd3jiK for <>; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 13:13:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4FC6C1294D1 for <>; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 13:13:30 -0800 (PST)
X-Default-Received-SPF: pass (skip=forwardok (res=PASS)) x-ip-name=;
From: "Susan Hares" <>
To: "'Joe Clarke'" <>, <>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 16:10:59 -0500
Message-ID: <015201d2404d$ef173260$cd459720$>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQJQdUo40QgeWLTd4TLWDuCDLWhaGp/frjmQ
Content-Language: en-us
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [i2rs] Question on opstate/ephemeral update
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Interface to The Internet Routing System \(IRS\)" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 21:13:32 -0000


I've updated the examples in the yang document.  Here's my understanding
with priorities (see ephemeral state requirements) with highest priority

Intended configuration priority = 2
Dhcp configuration priority = 1
Ephemeral state = 3 

Dhcp - would never update things, and I2RS would win over intended

Intended configuration priority = 1
Dhcp configuration priority = 2
Ephemeral state = 3

Dhcp takes precedence (wins) over intended configuration - so dhcp received
configurations are installed.  Ephemeral state wins over dhcp values. 

Does this make sense?    


-----Original Message-----
From: i2rs [] On Behalf Of Joe Clarke
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2016 1:56 AM
Subject: [i2rs] Question on opstate/ephemeral update

Given the tight timing of the meeting, I don't want to derail things. 
If we have time, I'll raise this at the mic.

But I do have a question on slide 2 of
.  I see DHCP along side the [I2RS] control plane DSes.  I understand that
the I2RS agent will handle the resolution of multiple client writes using

But how does that play with DHCP or local config?  In our ephemeral
requirements draft we say that local config (<intended> in this drawing)
would have a priority.  And that in the <applied> state the device would
have to resolve the local priorities with the "winning" config from the I2RS
agent.  But then DHCP writes a route.  How will that be handled?

I would like some clarity with respect to our priority requirements in the
ephemeral state draft.


i2rs mailing list