Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism

[Qin Wu <[e-mail]>]

Hi, Andy:
A few clarifications below.
>发件人: netmod [mailto:[e-mail]] 代表 Andy Bierman
>发送时间: 2021年8月17日 3:21
>收件人: Kent Watsen <[e-mail]>
>>抄送: [e-mail]
主题: Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism



On Sun, Aug 15, 2021 at 12:49 PM Kent Watsen <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:

It was a different email I think proposing extensions instead of a datastore.

This email: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/SHRPSxHIDxsfF2t0GXXiyFHOnGw/



>What is the purpose of system-configuration



>Use-case A)    The system sets some values because it knows what they shall

>be. In this case the client must not be allowed to modify these values. We

>want to check configuration data against these values.  E.g., AcmeHomeRouter

>has 5 interfaces called eth0, eth1, eth,2, eth3 and WAN. The client should

>not try to add or remove interfaces to this set.

>

>Use-case B)    The system provides initial values for something that can be

>configured in many ways. In this case the client is free to modify the

>system-defined values. E.g., an initial set of NACM rules is provided. In

>this case any constraints based on the system data are very weak, as the

>user can change the system-data itself.
>It is possible to support these use-cases with access-control conventions.

>I re-read RFC 8808 and 8342 again.
>IMO this draft overlaps the factory-default datastore.
>Unfortunately, RFC 8808 does not document NMDA, Appendix A3 details
>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8342#appendix-A.3
>It does not say if <factory-default> datastore feeds into <running> or into <intended>.
>It is not clear how <system> would interact with other datastores.
[Qin]: As described in Appendix-A.3, two ways to interact with other datastore are discussed, one is interact implicitly, the other is to use
RPC to trigger application of the datastore's data, in factory default setting case, <factory-reset> rpc will reset the contents of all relevant datastores to factory default state.
The extreme case of factory default state is no configuration at all for each datastore.


>It is not clear why it is even needed since <factory-default> contains only system settings.
[Qin]: I agree <factory-default> could have system setting. But unspecified for some reasons.
Based on earlier discussion on factory default, what content is included in <factory-default> and how to format this content, e.g., YANG instance file format
Have been ruled out of the scope. See the diff in v-07
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-netmod-factory-default-07.txt

K.


>Andy