On Fri, Aug 04, 2017 at 07:03:43AM +0000, Bogaert, Bart (Nokia - BE/Antwerp) wrote: > Maybe a stupid question from my side (I'm not involved in the NMDA work) > but is there some kind of consensus on what is proposed in this draft RFC or > are we miles away from such a consensus? Since this is linked to how a > server has to handle state in the proposed merging of config and state under > one branch of the tree coming to a conclusion to me seems a requirement > since in the current implementation we just can't change a CT leaf in the > running DS by a value that is dynamically learned; in the NMDA approach that > would be possible as the operational DS contains both CT and CF leaves and > consequently a value as configured by the client can be overwritten by a > dynamically learned value as the value configured by the client remains > untouched in the running DS. In the current implementation we would need to > model a CF leaf for this purpose. At least that is how I have always > understood how it should be done. As long as we do not have NDMA-based > server implementations we can't design and implement YANG models as proposed > in NMDA and its associated guidelines. >
Bart, you may want to look at draft-dsdt-nmda-guidelines-01. Protocol updates to support NMDA are on the way as well, draft-dsdt-nmda-netconf-00 and draft-dsdt-netconf-restconf-nmda-00. /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
