Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements

Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> Mon, 06 November 2017 17:12 UTC

Return-Path: <lberger@labn.net>
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 AD6F613FC58 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Nov 2017 09:12:40 -0800 (PST)
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, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-2.8, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (768-bit key) header.d=labn.net
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 ZgR75GRp6TGP for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Nov 2017 09:12:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gproxy2-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com (gproxy2-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com [69.89.18.3]) (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 ACF8C13FC56 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Mon, 6 Nov 2017 09:12:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from cmgw3 (unknown [10.0.90.84]) by gproxy2.mail.unifiedlayer.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60C731E0A06 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Mon, 6 Nov 2017 10:12:36 -0700 (MST)
Received: from box313.bluehost.com ([69.89.31.113]) by cmgw3 with id WhCZ1w0082SSUrH01hCclD; Mon, 06 Nov 2017 10:12:36 -0700
X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.2 cv=H76r+6Qi c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=h1BC+oY+fLhyFmnTBx92Jg==:117 a=h1BC+oY+fLhyFmnTBx92Jg==:17 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=xqWC_Br6kY4A:10 a=sC3jslCIGhcA:10 a=B6bsVrN823sM5u_vJfoA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=labn.net; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version :Date:Message-ID:From:References:To:Subject:Sender:Reply-To:Cc:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=AQ11vQZAJjlgxAEsnMpv48jSGVFGuF37h81QmT8Y5uk=; b=MoI+5EDxIWZYPxeldevQqsKBvf E7l/4YgMljuO21p93DN5uOndNIaSsjnWoR7oR4yDf7kr0MVDbAxzmCXauCbZtfur0On751nvLZHq1 nl5NeMYPlwvl0EVGOG+G5bNks;
Received: from pool-100-15-86-101.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([100.15.86.101]:35748 helo=[IPv6:::1]) by box313.bluehost.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from <lberger@labn.net>) id 1eBkwr-000ncv-5f; Mon, 06 Nov 2017 10:12:33 -0700
To: Robert Wilton <rwilton@cisco.com>, netmod@ietf.org
References: <CABCOCHS+g45H7P8nZ7tUQeW5Q=xXQRm7kQJWwsfG8PrR-DERSQ@mail.gmail.com> <20171106.141924.996087392255055625.mbj@tail-f.com> <15f9188b728.27d3.9b4188e636579690ba6c69f2c8a0f1fd@labn.net> <20171106.154913.1683303692062360930.mbj@tail-f.com> <15f91db9dd0.27d3.9b4188e636579690ba6c69f2c8a0f1fd@labn.net> <5c1d29df-4cdf-4972-5a11-0a111177bf93@cisco.com> <15f92077478.27d3.9b4188e636579690ba6c69f2c8a0f1fd@labn.net> <f4cf2723-af37-c0ba-be28-ccb635ee9b4a@cisco.com> <a6eac745-0784-daa2-103a-1c4b28990f51@labn.net> <20171106170247.l4tmjglageyakqgx@elstar.local>
From: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
Message-ID: <4dbcf0d6-a11a-e410-a958-32058914da53@labn.net>
Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2017 12:12:30 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20171106170247.l4tmjglageyakqgx@elstar.local>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - box313.bluehost.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - labn.net
X-BWhitelist: no
X-Source-IP: 100.15.86.101
X-Exim-ID: 1eBkwr-000ncv-5f
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-Source-Sender: pool-100-15-86-101.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([IPv6:::1]) [100.15.86.101]:35748
X-Source-Auth: lberger@labn.net
X-Email-Count: 4
X-Source-Cap: bGFibm1vYmk7bGFibm1vYmk7Ym94MzEzLmJsdWVob3N0LmNvbQ==
X-Local-Domain: yes
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/6cwAqrfS1Gm07skuIshV5NMWBWk>
Subject: Re: [netmod] Action and RPC statements
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: Mon, 06 Nov 2017 17:12:41 -0000

What's the standard way to reset a list to a default (based on
implementation)?

On 11/6/2017 12:02 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 06, 2017 at 11:48:23AM -0500, Lou Berger wrote:
>> The tags draft has an RPC to 'reset to default state'.  I could see
>> wanting the reset to be persistent or not depending on actual usage...
>>
> In general, I think we love the usage of standard operations like
> edit-config to manipulate configuration datastores and I think we
> dislike custom operations that manipulate configuration datastores.
>
> /js
>