Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revised-datastores-04
Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com> Mon, 11 September 2017 17:31 UTC
Return-Path: <mbj@tail-f.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 F3D0A13318D for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Sep 2017 10:31:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 FJBmI9CMZ4pl for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Sep 2017 10:31:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.tail-f.com (mail.tail-f.com [46.21.102.45]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE11613318C for <netmod@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Sep 2017 10:31:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (h-40-225.A165.priv.bahnhof.se [94.254.40.225]) by mail.tail-f.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AD8A01AE0403; Mon, 11 Sep 2017 19:31:16 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2017 19:31:24 +0200
Message-Id: <20170911.193124.713501339751798550.mbj@tail-f.com>
To: kwatsen@juniper.net
Cc: rwilton@cisco.com, lberger@labn.net, netmod@ietf.org
From: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
In-Reply-To: <E1A72908-D7D6-4FDF-BF77-8E6B0D2CFB4B@juniper.net>
References: <511deba5-34ca-dde2-6637-ceaf4c4af125@labn.net> <10476e00-0169-4258-449f-22cc7ca978a8@cisco.com> <E1A72908-D7D6-4FDF-BF77-8E6B0D2CFB4B@juniper.net>
X-Mailer: Mew version 6.7 on Emacs 24.5 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/Wzc9ywBLrFldS3lqVfTQ1Nd0QbQ>
Subject: Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revised-datastores-04
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 11 Sep 2017 17:31:20 -0000
Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net> wrote: > As an author, I believe the draft is ready for publication. > > Regarding Robert's editorial suggestions: > > 1) how moving "all" like this? (i.e., must have same modules, > deviations, etc.) > - datastores that all share exactly the same schema, allowing data to be > - copied > + datastores that share exactly the same schema, allowing all data to > be copied Or just remove "all". > 2) better, but I think we should expand "It" in the beginning of the > 2nd paragraph > to "The intended configuration datastore". Also, how about this for > the 3rd > paragraph instead? (fixes a couple plurality issues and one > transition issue): > > The contents of <intended> are related to the 'config true' > subset of <operational>, such that a client can determine to what > extent the intended configuration is currently applied by checking > whether the contents of <intended> also appear in <operational>. Ok. > 3) I'm okay with this. I agree that the proposed TOC changes are better. > 4) This is better. Agreed. /martin > > > Thanks, > Kent > > > > On 9/11/17, 11:22 AM, "Robert Wilton" > <rwilton@cisco.com<mailto:rwilton@cisco.com>> wrote: > > > As one of the authors, I would like to see a few minor editorial > updates, described below. Otherwise I believe that the document is > ready for publication. > > Proposed changes: > > 1. I think that the document could further emphasis that the schema > for all the conventional datastores must be the same. > > Old: > > 4.5. Conventional Configuration Datastores > > The conventional configuration datastores are a set of configuration > datastores that share a common schema, allowing data to be copied > between them. The term is meant as a generic umbrella description of > these datastores. The set of datastores include: > > New: > > 4.5. Conventional Configuration Datastores > > The conventional configuration datastores are a set of configuration > datastores that all share exactly the same schema, allowing data to be > copied > between them. The term is meant as a generic umbrella description of > these datastores. The set of datastores include: > > > > 2. I think that the description of the intended datastore could be > expanded to give a bit more clarity. > > OLD: > > 4.4. The Intended Configuration Datastore (<intended>) > > The intended configuration datastore (<intended>) is a read-only > configuration datastore. It is tightly coupled to <running>. When > data is written to <running>, the data that is to be validated is > also conceptually written to <intended>. Validation is performed on > the contents of <intended>. > > For simple implementations, <running> and <intended> are identical. > > <intended> does not persist across reboots; its relationship with > <running> makes that unnecessary. > > ... > > NEW: > > 4.4. The Intended Configuration Datastore (<intended>) > > The intended configuration datastore (<intended>) is a read-only > configuration datastore. It represents the configuration after all > configuration transformations to <running> are performed (e.g. > template expansion, inactive configuration removal), and is the > configuration that the system attempts to apply. > > It is tightly coupled to <running>. When data is written to > <running>, the data that is to be validated is also conceptually > written to <intended>. Validation is performed on the contents of > <intended>. > > For simple implementations, <running> and <intended> are identical. > > The contents of <intended> is also related to the 'config true' > subset of <operational>, and hence a client can determine to what > extent the intended configuration is currently applied by checking > whether the contents of <intended> also appears in <operational>. > > <intended> does not persist across reboots; its relationship with > <running> makes that unnecessary. > > ... > > 3. I think that it may aid readability if the section on conventional > configuration datastores was moved above the description of the > individual conventional configuration datastores, which could then be > intended one level. Best illustrated via the change to the table of > contents. > > E.g. current TOC: > > 4. Architectural Model of Datastores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 > 4.1. The Startup Configuration Datastore (<startup>) . . . . . 9 > 4.2. The Candidate Configuration Datastore (<candidate>) . . . 10 > 4.3. The Running Configuration Datastore (<running>) . . . . . 10 > 4.4. The Intended Configuration Datastore (<intended>) . . . . 10 > 4.5. Conventional Configuration Datastores . . . . . . . . . . 11 > 4.6. Dynamic Configuration Datastores . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 > 4.7. The Operational State Datastore (<operational>) . . . . . 11 > 4.7.1. Remnant Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 > 4.7.2. Missing Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 > 4.7.3. System-controlled Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 > 4.7.4. Origin Metadata Annotation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 > > Proposed TOC: > > 4. Architectural Model of Datastores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 > 4.1. Conventional Configuration Datastores . . . . . . . . . . 9 > 4.1.1. The Startup Configuration Datastore (<startup>) . . . 10 > 4.1.2. The Candidate Configuration Datastore (<candidate>) . 10 > 4.1.3. The Running Configuration Datastore (<running>) . . . 10 > 4.1.4. The Intended Configuration Datastore (<intended>) . . 11 > 4.2. Dynamic Configuration Datastores . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 > 4.3. The Operational State Datastore (<operational>) . . . . . 12 > 4.3.1. Remnant Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 > 4.3.2. Missing Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 > 4.3.3. System-controlled Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 > 4.3.4. Origin Metadata Annotation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 > > 4. Finally, I noticed one reference that could be improved, by > changing it from "(described below)" to a proper section reference: > > 647,648c644,645 > < circumstances, e.g., an abnormal value is 'in use', or due to > remnant > < configuration (described below). Note, that deviations are still > --- > > circumstances, e.g., an abnormal value is "in use", or due to remnant > > configuration (see Section 4.7.1). Note, that deviations are still > > Thanks, > Rob > > > On 01/09/2017 22:02, Lou Berger wrote: > > All, > > > > This starts a two week working group last call on > > draft-ietf-netmod-revised-datastores-04. > > > > The working group last call ends on September 17. > > Please send your comments to the netmod mailing list. > > > > Positive comments, e.g., "I've reviewed this document and > > believe it is ready for publication", are welcome! > > This is useful and important, even from authors. > > > > Thank you, > > Netmod Chairs
- [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revised-… Lou Berger
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… Robert Wilton
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… Kent Watsen
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… Robert Wilton
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… Robert Wilton
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… t.petch
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… Lou Berger
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… Phil Shafer
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… Ladislav Lhotka
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… t.petch
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… t.petch
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… t.petch
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… Ladislav Lhotka
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… t.petch
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… Phil Shafer
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… Phil Shafer
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… t.petch
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… t.petch
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… Martin Bjorklund
- [netmod] <running> vs <intended> [was Re: WG Last… Robert Wilton
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… Robert Wilton
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… Lou Berger
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [netmod] <running> vs <intended> [was Re: WG … Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] <running> vs <intended> [was Re: WG … Robert Wilton
- Re: [netmod] <running> vs <intended> [was Re: WG … Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] <running> vs <intended> [was Re: WG … Robert Wilton
- Re: [netmod] <running> vs <intended> [was Re: WG … Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] <running> vs <intended> [was Re: WG … Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] <running> vs <intended> Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [netmod] <running> vs <intended> Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] <running> vs <intended> Robert Wilton
- Re: [netmod] <running> vs <intended> Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… t.petch
- Re: [netmod] <running> vs <intended> Robert Wilton
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… Robert Wilton
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… Robert Wilton
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… Lou Berger
- Re: [netmod] <running> vs <intended> Robert Wilton
- Re: [netmod] <running> vs <intended> t.petch
- Re: [netmod] <running> vs <intended> Robert Wilton
- Re: [netmod] <running> vs <intended> Robert Wilton
- [netmod] RFC 2119 language [was Re: WG Last Call:… Robert Wilton
- Re: [netmod] RFC 2119 language [was Re: WG Last C… Lou Berger
- Re: [netmod] RFC 2119 language Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [netmod] RFC 2119 language [was Re: WG Last C… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] RFC 2119 language [was Re: WG Last C… Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] RFC 2119 language [was Re: WG Last C… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] RFC 2119 language [was Re: WG Last C… Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] RFC 2119 language [was Re: WG Last C… Lou Berger
- Re: [netmod] RFC 2119 language [was Re: WG Last C… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] RFC 2119 language [was Re: WG Last C… Lou Berger
- Re: [netmod] <running> vs <intended> Robert Wilton
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… Robert Wilton
- Re: [netmod] <running> vs <intended> t.petch
- Re: [netmod] <running> vs <intended> Robert Wilton
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… Robert Wilton
- Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revi… Robert Wilton