IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [netmod] draft netmod charter update proposal

Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz> Tue, 21 March 2017 09:13 UTC

Return-Path: <lhotka@nic.cz>
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 5BBBD129477 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 02:13:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7 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=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] 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 aisEnds0SjUO for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 02:13:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.nic.cz (mail.nic.cz [IPv6:2001:1488:800:400::400]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E6AD3124D68 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 02:13:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [IPv6:2001:718:1a02:1:d20:8e4d:8768:16f6] (unknown [IPv6:2001:718:1a02:1:d20:8e4d:8768:16f6]) by mail.nic.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 59C93600D2; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 10:13:41 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=nic.cz; s=default; t=1490087621; bh=JxKZk3ACrkhPbU7xcycPe9Nr2Qoib+KqRCGr/xewmHg=; h=From:Date:To; b=hC7uhBrx8NHtZhKd7U2jDWc7qs/q/KZLnzVsa/qbeSxrA9lqWDFZOJmJKrU4onZak m1EoVt2TzBZwXp26+snsABqCVIp9Um+4EANlq3JyhanXtltc+UdkklO6LwHjjRAjdu R0N5JkkGW2bcA5+oy2PLiAZ4/baFaz5SLgspSVXc=
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: <20170321080422.GB35044@elstar.local>
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 10:13:40 +0100
Cc: Robert Wilton <rwilton@cisco.com>, Mehmet Ersue <mersue@gmail.com>, Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>, netmod@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <0298C599-E206-4777-A95C-5F58E0D519AA@nic.cz>
References: <01c601d29855$94b70470$be250d50$@gmail.com> <e3527c28-8c9f-9ef2-9b09-767b389f5dc5@labn.net> <02e701d29d93$0e770480$2b650d80$@gmail.com> <20170316064419.GA59114@elstar.local> <15ad6df64e8.27d3.9b4188e636579690ba6c69f2c8a0f1fd@labn.net> <000f01d29f21$8fe93c10$afbbb430$@gmail.com> <2748e6e6-5d16-05e9-0ce5-bc2b3a7e69cc@cisco.com> <C843261B-209D-4BEF-AD06-749F604C22D2@nic.cz> <562b9d03-dc1a-3741-8be7-c33afd7d74c4@cisco.com> <4D1DE368-9B3D-478B-BE06-C5ED9A88B8F8@nic.cz> <20170321080422.GB35044@elstar.local>
To: Jürgen Schönwälder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
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/netmod/HDETJ3suZOYpidCL3m60rwk3bZE>
Subject: Re: [netmod] draft netmod charter update proposal
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: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 09:13:46 -0000

> On 21 Mar 2017, at 09:04, Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de> wrote:
> 
> On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 04:33:24PM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>> 
>> I don't think that config true/false is necessarily tied to a particular set of datastores, it can be generalized to RW/RO.
>> 
> 
> I do not agree that config true/false just means read write and I
> certainly do not want semantics of statements to be changed. It is
> easy to create new statements if needed.

The revised-datastores draft changes the semantics of "configuration data" - for example, the definition from RFC 6241 clearly won't apply to the "running" datastore in the new datastore model. So a new definition of configuration data will probably be needed, and this implicitly changes the semantics of the "config" statement.

BTW, we use rw/ro in tree diagrams.

Lada

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

--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email