Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-revised-datastores-04

[Robert Wilton <[e-mail]>]

On 11/09/2017 18:31, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> Kent Watsen <[e-mail]> 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".
I also have a slight preference for just removing "all", but am also OK 
if it moves.

Thanks,
Rob


>
>> 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"
>> <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> 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
> .
>