On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 04:15:00PM +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > Hi, > > Issue https://github.com/netmod-wg/entity/issues/13 > > Should the model support pre-configuration of hardware components? > The current model supports pre-configuration of components provided > the operator knows the name of the component to be installed. A more > useful model would use the parent component, class, and > parent-rel-pos as identification. If the system detects a component > and there is configuration available for the parent component, > class, and parent-rel-pos then the system would instatiate the > component with the provided name, and optionally additional > parameters. > > See also various mails from Timothy Carey and Bart Bogaert on this > issue. > > Personally, I think that we should add these nodes, since the ML > comments indicated that pre configuration is pretty useful. >
I am still not sure what exactly this will do. I have been looking at <https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netmod/current/msg17039.html>. I am provisioning mfg-name (Preferred value is the manufacturer name string actually printed on the component itself (if present).) but all I have is that something of a certain expected class has been plugged into a certain position of the parent container. Also note that mfg-name scopes comparisons of other properties. I would have similar questions concerning the model-name; how can a provisioning system predict the 'vendor-specific model name identifier'? Or is the whole idea that if I plug something that does not match, the component is left in a special state (which one)? If this is the intention, then this needs to be spelled out clearly somewhere. /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103 <http://www.jacobs-university.de/> _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
