Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-wu-netmod-factory-default-02

Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com> Mon, 13 May 2019 03:25 UTC

Return-Path: <bill.wu@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 62350120049 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 12 May 2019 20:25:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.94
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.94 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_OBFUSCATE_05_10=0.26, 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 I0SsO-o9tYLC for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 12 May 2019 20:25:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [185.176.76.210]) (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 DC2E912015C for <netmod@ietf.org>; Sun, 12 May 2019 20:25:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhreml707-cah.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.106]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id F0860407AD45BAB4B7CB for <netmod@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 May 2019 04:25:51 +0100 (IST)
Received: from lhreml704-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.53) by lhreml707-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.48) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Mon, 13 May 2019 04:25:51 +0100
Received: from lhreml704-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.53) by lhreml704-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.53) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1713.5; Mon, 13 May 2019 04:25:51 +0100
Received: from NKGEML412-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.98.56.73) by lhreml704-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.53) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_0, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA_P256) id 15.1.1713.5 via Frontend Transport; Mon, 13 May 2019 04:25:50 +0100
Received: from NKGEML513-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.1.144]) by nkgeml412-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.98.56.73]) with mapi id 14.03.0415.000; Mon, 13 May 2019 11:25:43 +0800
From: Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com>
To: "Joe Clarke (jclarke)" <jclarke@cisco.com>
CC: Kent Watsen <kent+ietf@watsen.net>, "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-wu-netmod-factory-default-02
Thread-Index: AdUJOv5diBJKwEvESayhrM+gAUAW3Q==
Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 03:25:43 +0000
Message-ID: <B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABAA491092B@nkgeml513-mbx.china.huawei.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.134.31.203]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABAA491092Bnkgeml513mbxchi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/Ms6tA0svxU9ctJenXjRVkpMgTzs>
Subject: Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-wu-netmod-factory-default-02
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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, 13 May 2019 03:25:56 -0000

发件人: Joe Clarke (jclarke) [mailto:jclarke@cisco.com]
发送时间: 2019年5月9日 22:27
收件人: Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com>;
抄送: Kent Watsen <kent+ietf@watsen.net>;; netmod@ietf.org
主题: Re: [netmod] Adoption poll for draft-wu-netmod-factory-default-02


First, the term “YANG server” sounds odd to me.  I know what you mean, but I haven’t seen this defined before.  Maybe just saying a device or host is sufficient?

[Qin]: Right, “host”, in my opinion, is not a term used in the context of NETCONF, it is also usually referred to end device in many cases, I prefer to use device. The device should have YANG capability.

Seems like suggestions from Martin and Jürgen will sort this out.

[Qin]:Yes.
When you talk about the datastore to be reset, you list <running>, <startup>, and <candidate>.  You state that each will receive the contents of <factory-default>.  The <candidate> DS wouldn’t need that.  I think it would just be zeroed out.

[Qin]: I have no strong opinion for this, <candidate> is also part of read-write configuration datastores, we could reset <candidate>, but I think it is not recommended based on what you say.

That’s my point.  I don’t think you want to really do anything with <candidate>.  Resetting <startup> and for runtime, <running> would seem to be sufficient (modulo other DSes the system may support).

[Qin]:I will add text to make this clear.

I think the RPC should reset any and all non-derived read-write datastores and not imply that a specific DS’s contents (i.e., the factory-default DS) is copied to them.  This way, other DSes would just be handled by this RPC based on implementation.  The <factory-default> can exist as the factory default contents for <startup>.
[Qin]: We have decoupled <factory-reset> rpc from <factory-default> datastore, since <factory-default> datastore is defined as optional datastore in the current version, <factory-default> content can be specified in many different ways, not limited to take content of <factory-default> datastore.
Also <factory-default> content is referred to preconfigured initial configuration that can be used to initialize the configuration of a server.
These will address your comment.

You still mention that you copy these contents as part of the RPC (or maybe I misread).  This is what led to my confusion.
[Qin]:I see, I will tweak the text to change as follows:
“copy the content of the datastore” into “copy the factory default content”.
Thanks Joe.
Joe