Benoit Claise <bcla...@cisco.com> wrote: > Hi Martin, > > Thanks. > Only kept the relevant excerpts. > > > >> - Some objects are read-write in RFC6933: > >> entPhysicalSerialNum > >> entPhysicalAlias > >> entPhysicalAssetID > >> entPhysicalUris > >> > >> For example, entPhysicalSerialNum being read-write always bothered me. > >> serial-num is now "config false", which is a good news IMO. > > Actually, this was not the intention. In draft-ietf-netmod-entity-03 > > this is configurable. I missed this in the conversion to NMDA. > Ah. So no good news in this case... > > > >> In the reverse direction, entPhysicalMfgName is read-only in RFC6933, > >> while it's "config true" in draft-ietf-netmod-entity > > Yes, this was added per request from the WG. See e.g. the thread > > "draft-ietf-netmod-entity issue #13". > Sure. It was mainly an observation. > > > > However, I think that what we have now is probably not correct. I > > think that all nodes 'serial-num', 'mfg-name', and 'model-name' should > > be config true, and the description of list 'component' updated to > > reflect that all these tree leafs are handled the same way. > > > > I would like to know what the WG thinks about this. > Talking as a contributor this time. > It seems that inventory management is kind of broken when someone can > change 'serial-num', 'mfg-name', and 'model-name.
They can't really change them. The configured values are only used (i.e. visible in the operational state) if the device cannot detect them automatically. I.e., they work as "post-it" notes only. /martin _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
