On 09/02/2015 11:38 AM, Andy Bierman wrote: > > > > I like this, but I would actually not use mount here. I don't think > > it is necessary. This would be a model for devices that support > > multiple 'virtual-servers' / 'logical-network-elements'. So in this > > model you configure these logical-network-elements and allocate > > resources like interfaces etc to them. For true virtual servers, > > you'd also configure the NETCONF server and authentication params, > > meaning that each such virtual server has its own config, which is > > completely separate from the others. In this architecture, it would > > not be correct to mount all the models in the virtual server list. > > > > We discussed this in the DT and (I think) agreed there is room / need > for both approaches based on device owner/client management model (i.e., > is the device owner responsible for client config, device owner without > client view.) > > > > How does this work in YANG exactly? I can see how yang might be used to manage an NFV 'hypervisor' that would spin up some base level of management capability, but would like to hear what Martin was thinking as he's the one that proposed this...
Lou > How does the "foo" container get rooted under "/" in 1 server implementation > and get rooted under "/device" in another server implementation? > I am confused as to why this would be considered a feature and not a bug. > > > > Do you have a reference for a model that can be used to > support this, or just thinking one is needed? _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
