[netmod] Re: Mohamed Boucadair's Discuss on draft-ietf-netmod-system-config-18: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

[Kent Watsen <[e-mail]>]

Hi Med,

> +1 to Quifang's comments.  Effectively, I think that this was a limitation in the original NMDA architecture that is being corrected.

I agree that the <system-config> document should be seen as correcting RFC 8342 (NMDA).


Separately, I think the WG made a mistake when publishing RFC 8808, which should have also *updated* RFC 8342.  It is unfortunate (dare I say tragic), as the <factory-default> datastore remains hidden to many.   IDK if there exists a mechanism to change the "update" status of a document after publication.   One might ask, how exactly RFC 8808 updates RFC 8342?  As, technically, deriving an "identity" off of a base identity doesn't seem to raise to the level of an "update".  That said, I wish that RFC 8808 had in it a diagram, like the one below, which could be construed as an update?



+-------------+                 +-----------+
| <candidate> |                 | <startup> |
|  (ct, rw)   |<---+       +--->| (ct, rw)  |
+-------------+    |       |    +-----------+
                   |       |          |
                +-----------+         |     +-------------------+
                | <running> |<--------+     | <factory-default> |
                | (ct, rw)  |<--------------|      (ct, ro)     |
                +----+------+               +-------------------+
                     |
<SNIP/>




Kent  // as co-author of RFC 8342 (NMDA)