[netmod] Comments on NMDA-04

[Balazs Lengyel <[e-mail]>]

Hello,

Reading the draft-ietf-netmod-revised-datastores-04 some comments:

General) The system often adds data to the <running> or <intended> 
datastore already not just to <operational>: e.g.

UC1: I have a server configured in running. I need to bind it to an 
ip-address. The ip-address might be the local loopback address, however 
if that is only added to the <operational>, validation will fail 
indicating that the server is bound to a non-existent address. How to 
handle this?

UC2: I have a set of capabilities set by the system e.g. 
supported-reporting-intervals. I need to configure a job that MUST use 
one of these intervals. If the supported-reporting-intervals are only 
added to <operational> I can not validate the selected-interval in my 
configured job.

My proposal is to allow the system to add data to running as well. 
Actually I think that is a more relevant case then adding configuration 
just to <operation>.

CH 4.4.)  "Validation is performed on  the contents of <intended>." This 
to me means that default data is not considered at validation which 
would be a backwards incompatible change. Also if validation does not 
consider system configured data that would allow cases like multiple 
interfaces named lo0. One from <intended> one from system configuration. 
IMHO while it is OK to violate uniqueness because of remnant data, the 
above violation of uniqueness seems a bad idea.

Ch. 4.7) Is it allowed to violate uniqueness of key values? IMHO it 
should not be.

Ch 5.1) IMHO actions and rpcs should be allowed to include other 
datastores in their XPath evaluation. My suggestion is that they need to 
specify it somehow. (Yang extension?)

UC1) I want to define a convinience action that allows me to do a big 
modification in <running> in one step. I wan't to validate what it is 
doing based on the current contents of running. E.g. configure the OAM 
settings for the system including SNMP/Netconf/FTP in one step, but for 
each step I need to check that I am putting the relevant server on an 
existing interface.
If specifying the datastore is an overkill, I would still rather chose 
runing as the accessible datastore. XPath is mostly use for checks. 
Checks are done against configuration.

Appendix B)

"4. How applied     : automatic"    This is definitely not enough to 
understand what happens even as an example. I propose:
Changes are automatically propagated to <operational>

C.1)  During the example the
     <ip>2001:db8::10</ip>
      <prefix-length>32</prefix-length>
is changed to 64 its. Is that intentional? It is not mentioned in the text.

regards Balazs


-- 
Balazs Lengyel                       Ericsson Hungary Ltd.
Senior Specialist
Mobile: [phone]              email: [e-mail]