IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [netmod] draft-ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis-06 deviation query

Rohit R Ranade <rohitrranade@huawei.com> Wed, 30 May 2018 06:40 UTC

Return-Path: <rohitrranade@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C6EE12EC7C for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 May 2018 23:40:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.201
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 yvtuuNaA5ljQ for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 May 2018 23:40:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7E1DC12EC5C for <netmod@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 May 2018 23:40:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhreml708-cah.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.106]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 2CD8CA7F52839; Wed, 30 May 2018 07:40:11 +0100 (IST)
Received: from DGGEML402-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.17.38) by lhreml708-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.49) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.382.0; Wed, 30 May 2018 07:40:12 +0100
Received: from DGGEML510-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.2.161]) by DGGEML402-HUB.china.huawei.com ([fe80::fca6:7568:4ee3:c776%31]) with mapi id 14.03.0382.000; Wed, 30 May 2018 14:40:03 +0800
From: Rohit R Ranade <rohitrranade@huawei.com>
To: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
CC: Robert Wilton <rwilton@cisco.com>, "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [netmod] draft-ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis-06 deviation query
Thread-Index: AdP3LxM2Qa00BJMETVeCiSY+xVpFu///grGA//9vcjCAAKFHAP/+R98QgALxoID//3TFwA==
Date: Wed, 30 May 2018 06:40:02 +0000
Message-ID: <991B70D8B4112A4699D5C00DDBBF878A6BBB2F8A@dggeml510-mbx.china.huawei.com>
References: <991B70D8B4112A4699D5C00DDBBF878A6BBB23B2@dggeml510-mbx.china.huawei.com> <71e76c7e-4043-d80a-73ac-1759e85cc5d7@cisco.com> <991B70D8B4112A4699D5C00DDBBF878A6BBB241F@dggeml510-mbx.china.huawei.com> <c8d34f1f-8dcc-2915-0d77-98300ae8067e@cisco.com> <991B70D8B4112A4699D5C00DDBBF878A6BBB2C11@dggeml510-mbx.china.huawei.com> <20180530053933.jvzkjgfnhxvhdmak@anna.jacobs.jacobs-university.de>
In-Reply-To: <20180530053933.jvzkjgfnhxvhdmak@anna.jacobs.jacobs-university.de>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.18.150.121]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/1q0CBbcnEVBWaA3L23gedQ9Y7CM>
Subject: Re: [netmod] draft-ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis-06 deviation query
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETMOD WG list <netmod.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netmod/>
List-Post: <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 May 2018 06:40:16 -0000

Hi Juergen,

My intention is only to get clarity about what is the meaning of implementing a module in a data-store, as it used in below places,

" It must be possible to NOT implement a module or feature in
       <operational>, even if it is implemented in some other datastore"

"   2.  A dynamic configuration datastore must be able to implement a
       module or feature that is not implemented in the conventional
       configuration datastores."

A module having only "ro" nodes , can be considered to be implemented in any data-store ? operational/ephemeral etc
A module having "rw" nodes,  what is the rules for it to be considered implemented in a data-store ?

RFC 7950 is quite clear for the rules for when a module is considered implemented. Please clarify implementation with respect to data-store also.

With Regards,
Rohit R Ranade

-----Original Message-----
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de] 
Sent: 30 May 2018 11:10
To: Rohit R Ranade <rohitrranade@huawei.com>
Cc: Robert Wilton <rwilton@cisco.com>; netmod@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netmod] draft-ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis-06 deviation query

On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 05:21:29AM +0000, Rohit R Ranade wrote:
> 
> Also what does it mean that state-modules have been "implemented" in the <running> data-store ?
>

The server implemented an empty set of objects. No client should have an issue with that and a server may choose to report this (for example if the server wants to have a single schema for all datastores).

I do not see why making this illegal would simplify anything. It seems making this illegal just adds complexity for no value.

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <https://www.jacobs-university.de/>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email