"Susan Hares" wrote:
>
>
> Feedback to presenter.
>
>
>
> You indicated that ephemeral was dynamic protocols, but that DCHP was
> configuration protocols. The text indicates that the ephemeral state is a
> control-plane datastore,
The architecure allows for new control-plane datastores to
On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 09:48:35AM +0900, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> Juergen Schoenwaelder writes:
>
> > On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 11:23:04AM +0900, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I've read the revised-datastores-00 document, in general I like it, here
> >> are my initial comments and que
Feedback to presenter.
You indicated that ephemeral was dynamic protocols, but that DCHP was
configuration protocols. The text indicates that the ephemeral state is a
control-plane datastore,
We should be able to have 2 ephemeral datastores which are control-plane
datastores. The tracki
Hi Clyde,
Most implementations probably have limits in the # of files, remote
destinations, etc they will support. If vendors decide to augment the model to
add max-elements then they'd do it for a number of the lists here. That
doesn't seem like a big deal. But trying to fit into a model wi
I have something that might delay WGLC, but found out an optimization which
would help in the future
In ietf-packet-fields.yang, example below
grouping acl-ipv4-header-fields {
description
"Fields in IPv4 header.";
leaf destination-ipv4-network {
type inet:ipv4-prefix;
descr
Juergen Schoenwaelder writes:
> On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 11:23:04AM +0900, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I've read the revised-datastores-00 document, in general I like it, here
>> are my initial comments and questions:
>>
>> 1. Even if is valid, it can still be in conflict with the
>>
Martin:
Thank you. As usual, your answer is clear and enables me to work on the
next steps of coding and standardization.
I'd love to talk off-list on how I've merged to I2RS RIB ephemeral control
protocol data store and Netconf intended datastore in a prototype in the
CONFD code.
Sue
--
On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 01:42:18PM -0800, Andy Bierman wrote:
> Hi,
>
> How do the YANG validation rules for datastores apply to this new framework?
> The YANG RFC just refers to a 'valid' datastore. Is validation ever done
> on the 'intended' datastore, or just 'running' (what we have now).
Note
Hi,
How do the YANG validation rules for datastores apply to this new framework?
The YANG RFC just refers to a 'valid' datastore. Is validation ever done
on the 'intended' datastore, or just 'running' (what we have now).
The framework you propose seems reasonable but the real issues show
up in th
Hi,
"Susan Hares" wrote:
> Juergen and Lada:
>
> #2 - is interesting to me. Is dynamic configuration protocol = I2RS? Or
> control-plane protocols = I2RS?
Details tbd, but this architecture allows for a new kind of datastore
("control-plane datastore") which could be defined for i2rs.
> On
Juergen and Lada:
#2 - is interesting to me. Is dynamic configuration protocol = I2RS? Or
control-plane protocols = I2RS?
On #5 - how do you merge I2RS RIB static routes + routing-configuration rib
routes? Can you see the difference in the applied configuration?
Thanks,
Sue
-Origina
Hi Jason,
Buffer was a subject of discussion on the netmod list most recently by Tom
Petch who raised some questions. In an e-mail on 2016/5/6 Tom said:
“The description of log-buffer confuses me. The buffer is circular in nature
so there is only one of them; but it is a list keyed on 'name' s
Updates:
- Andy Bierman is now presenting the entity draft
- Dean Bogdanovic is presenting the Routing Area DT Update
- Clyde Wildes is now presenting -11 (not -09)
- the presentation of the alarm draft has been removed
- the time-slot for session 2 has been corrected
https://www.ietf.o
On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 11:23:04AM +0900, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've read the revised-datastores-00 document, in general I like it, here
> are my initial comments and questions:
>
> 1. Even if is valid, it can still be in conflict with the
>actual content of that may come from e.
14 matches
Mail list logo