Re: [netmod] some comments on revised-datastores-01

[Juergen Schoenwaelder <[e-mail]>]

On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 02:28:53PM +0000, Kent Watsen wrote:
> 
> > But this logic is already broken for the datastores defined in the
> > revised datastores document. It defines an identity for startup but
> > not all systems implement startup. End of proof.
> 
> Ha ha, yes professor.  But recall this started as a discussion regarding
> what to do for the new dynamic datastores (not built-in datastores) and
> then someone said maybe we should support other datastores too.  I'm not
> sure we need to do this but, if we did, then we could create modules for
> them (i.e., ietf-startup).
>

I believe this is the wrong direction, even if we rewrite the module
in the revised datastores document and split it into multiple modules.
A simple list of implemented datastores is cheap. It is flexible. It
does not require explanations and rules how definitions must be split
into modules that finally must be remembered and checked still in 5-10
years from now. I firmly believe that these types of 'optimizations'
lead to creeping complexity down the road. Lets not create CLRs how
modules must be structued, named, etc.

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: [phone]         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
Fax:   [phone]         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>