Re: [netmod] [Netconf] LC of NDMA NETCONF/RESTCONF drafts

Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com> Thu, 08 February 2018 19:27 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 4F85E127286; Thu, 8 Feb 2018 11:27:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, 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 hzen3uYBpCQv; Thu, 8 Feb 2018 11:27:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.tail-f.com (mail.tail-f.com [46.21.102.45]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9816124BE8; Thu, 8 Feb 2018 11:27:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (h-80-27.A165.priv.bahnhof.se [212.85.80.27]) by mail.tail-f.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ED4271AE046C; Thu, 8 Feb 2018 20:27:32 +0100 (CET)
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2018 20:27:32 +0100 (CET)
Message-Id: <20180208.202732.195106484925473126.mbj@tail-f.com>
To: andy@yumaworks.com
Cc: j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de, netconf@ietf.org, netmod@ietf.org
From: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABCOCHQBWawB=d1-+8KVWQaMX-TVBf8KU6QdK7An6cPoB0gthA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABCOCHR95zL=AZ-LLq_1FsCff9dgUKP5_33uY7W7OMd8tdfb3w@mail.gmail.com> <20180208073617.yico4gvfrl6xdusw@elstar.local> <CABCOCHQBWawB=d1-+8KVWQaMX-TVBf8KU6QdK7An6cPoB0gthA@mail.gmail.com>
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/gPQ806IPMXgeyXZx0ZgdZyoXuJQ>
Subject: Re: [netmod] [Netconf] LC of NDMA NETCONF/RESTCONF drafts
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: Thu, 08 Feb 2018 19:27:35 -0000

Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com> wrote:
> > ....
> > Who needs all this to manage a network?
> >
> >
> 
> I sometimes get comments from people about NETCONF defaults, like
> "You think this is a standard? Why does a vendor get to decide what
> is a default leaf?"
> 
> CoMI has taken a different approach.
> Every server MUST implement "trim" mode and nothing else.
> NETCONF should do the same (but won't)

Since we're now defining a new datastore, <operational>, we have the
opportunity to define one single behavour that all servers MUST
implement.  That's why the draft says that defaults are injected as
data flows into <operational>, and that all values that are in use
(including defaults), are present in <operational> and always
returned.


/martin