The document tries to update the definition of or:intended in NMDA, you may want to refer to the last paragraph of section 1.3 (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-netmod-system-config-09#section-1.3), which says: "This document also updates the definition of "intended" origin metadata annotation identity defined in Section 5.3.4 of [RFC8342]. The "intended" identity of origin value defined in [RFC8342] represents the origin of configuration provided by <intended>, this document updates its definition as the origin source of configuration explicitly provided by <running>, and allows a subset of configuration in <intended> that flows from <system> yet is not configured or overridden explicitly in <running> to use "system" as its origin value."
Best Regards, Qiufang -----Original Message----- From: Jürgen Schönwälder <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, November 8, 2024 10:23 PM To: maqiufang (A) <[email protected]> Cc: Jason Sterne <[email protected]>; Kent Watsen <[email protected]>; [email protected] Subject: Re: [netmod] Re: origin "system" in system-config-09 This then likely makes sense but if system is merged into intended, then values should have or:intended, no? /js On Fri, Nov 08, 2024 at 01:42:45PM +0000, maqiufang (A) wrote: > Hi, Jürgen, > > It is, but the identity defined in the I-D is only derived from > ds:conventional. To use sysds:system as the origin value, I think it needs to > be derived from or:origin, which I am unsure if possible, since the identical > identity (i.e., system derived from origin) is already defined in RFC8342. > > Best Regards, > Qiufang > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jürgen Schönwälder <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, November 8, 2024 8:10 PM > To: maqiufang (A) <[email protected]> > Cc: Jason Sterne <[email protected]>; Kent Watsen > <[email protected]>; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [netmod] Re: origin "system" in system-config-09 > > On Fri, Nov 08, 2024 at 12:08:05PM +0000, maqiufang (A) wrote: > > Hi, Jason, all, > > > > I think all system configuration that is non-deletable should be defined in > > <system>, if things differ from case to case, I have concern that it is > > hard to enumerate all cases. The draft already states that <system> may > > change dynamically. Deletable system configuration should be present in > > <running>, otherwise how is it possible for the client to delete it? If it > > is in <running>, doesn't it have an origin value "intended"? If we make a > > distinction this way, is it safe to infer that all nodes using or:system > > are originating from <system>? Am I missing something? > > > > Jürgen has suggested to use sysds:system to report configuration > > originating from <system>, but I am unsure if that is possible to define > > another identical identity also derived from "origin" identity? > > It is defined in your ID... > > /js > > -- > Jürgen Schönwälder Constructor University Bremen gGmbH > Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany > -- Jürgen Schönwälder Constructor University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
