Hi, > While I agree with Martin, in our systems we have a number of places, where > the system does create configuration in running, due to > > different levels of automation and autonomous algorithms kick-in > the created config needs to be possible to be further modified by the operator > the created config needs to be referenced from operator created config > the created config is not always ephemeral, it might need to be part of > backup/restore This is only a sampling from "the list of excuses". I have heard many more. The road to hell is paved with good intentions, however. If we want to build automation based on sound theory, clearly separating the orders from managers from a system's own operational view is key, IMO. Reliability, security, accountability are growing in importance, and they all play in this direction.
We may not need to standardize rules to outlaw the above; the market will take care of that. What we need to ensure is that it is possible to be standards compliant without having to implement design excuses like these. Best Regards, /jan
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
