IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Netconf] [netmod] WG adoption poll draft-nmdsdt-netmod-revised-datastores-00

Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz> Mon, 19 December 2016 12:56 UTC

Return-Path: <lhotka@nic.cz>
X-Original-To: netconf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netconf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54C241299D6; Mon, 19 Dec 2016 04:56:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-3.1] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nic.cz
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id N4qKF6Io6mlg; Mon, 19 Dec 2016 04:56:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.nic.cz (mail.nic.cz [217.31.204.67]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 381F41299F2; Mon, 19 Dec 2016 04:56:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [IPv6:2001:718:1a02:1:691f:24b5:66f8:76be] (unknown [IPv6:2001:718:1a02:1:691f:24b5:66f8:76be]) by mail.nic.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 920DE6FF55; Mon, 19 Dec 2016 13:56:17 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=nic.cz; s=default; t=1482152177; bh=zniibWwvHrKScqhkfICCfXWiFBTXM07XczeXdktOCjg=; h=From:Date:To; b=EU9MYYE1NZpdumi3kWkQRzSijzTqdJa5A6Wts92tKTIrdWQUzJ1EktgoP8qK8NUiS xuNurvVwmfeXS+jxH7dJ+bfX/ZxBoNM03b1q3jJXgZ1hWVUHrNHteJQSVqi3JL/+nI xn6XL1z8sBW/ZcQuerHaUlIzoefWtURyLNFzo5Eg=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\))
From: Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz>
In-Reply-To: <81B98FB8-DF86-4151-B3E6-322F0A5FAAAE@tail-f.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2016 13:56:17 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <B3466312-876E-49C5-8D38-D96BB488973E@nic.cz>
References: <beb56258-c0ae-f625-a2d4-50f6a4c0bf26@labn.net> <B0E8B70F-56B8-48BF-95E8-83A241DD7A45@nic.cz> <20161205093858.GA97253@elstar.local> <9448A315-D0B4-46E3-8456-C648698B50A0@nic.cz> <20161205120210.GA97559@elstar.local> <CABCOCHQZJvCp2=Ay=nMfZPqwLkKe2OCZAZhTaKVryNEKThitNw@mail.gmail.com> <CAGyj0qOOJZg2b9UA2q7oAEkdEJaNLUd6n_Dc+CE5=U8N7ifsrw@mail.gmail.com> <F8614A0D-518C-4A05-BB7D-C460CD3D5972@nic.cz> <52c8547e61354c1a9adefc69ff07a4a7@XCH-RTP-013.cisco.com> <CABCOCHToDs98tr3o5Np1vjvKa9uMS_MWKJZHo8GQtNj_1xXEiQ@mail.gmail.com> <004101d25589$a0cd5f20$e2681d60$@gmail.com> <CABCOCHTnCu4uE=da2Z+rOArGBoMXcicsofgLQP8LPLGkR-ho5Q@mail.gmail.com> <m2mvfyr3jd.fsf@birdie.labs.nic.cz> <001001d259cf$3d5a0de0$b80e29a0$@hansfords.net> <1665b254-b9eb-3260-9b66-1e82662b36ac@cisco.com> <81B98FB8-DF86-4151-B3E6-322F0A5FAAAE@tail-f.com>
To: Jan Lindblad <janl@tail-f.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3259)
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.99.2 at mail
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/TwA5TJGxct2S9hZ94b3lsAx8d60>
Cc: NetMod WG Chairs <netmod-chairs@ietf.org>, NetConf WG Chairs <netconf-chairs@ietf.org>, NetMod WG <netmod@ietf.org>, Netconf <netconf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Netconf] [netmod] WG adoption poll draft-nmdsdt-netmod-revised-datastores-00
X-BeenThere: netconf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Network Configuration WG mailing list <netconf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netconf>, <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netconf/>
List-Post: <mailto:netconf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf>, <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2016 12:56:22 -0000

> On 19 Dec 2016, at 12:31, Jan Lindblad <janl@tail-f.com> wrote:
> 
>> But once you only have machines programming the config, then they should be able to easily construct a single message for each edit of the config (which can be applied/failed in its entirety). Candidate and locking don't seem to help here.
>> 
>> Further, if you want to update multiple devices at the same time then you end up in the realm of distributed transactions which get very complicated and are hard to get right in a fully robust fashion.
> 
> Harder still without the candidate. Any case where transaction phases or timing is involved would be harder to get right without the candidate and confirmed commit. Being far from perfect, it's the best standardized configuration protocol out there.

Per-user candidate datastores are much easier to deal with, and this is what we do in our RESTCONF implementation:

https://github.com/CZ-NIC/jetconf

Lada

> 
> /jan
> 

--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email