Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism

Jason (Nokia - CA/Ottawa) Sent: Friday, August 27, 2021 5:55 PM To: Jan Lindblad (jlindbla) ; Andy Bierman Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism And then maybe it is useful to have a standard mechanism to see what system config is available in a server. Tha

Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism

(Nokia - CA/Ottawa) Sent: Friday, August 27, 2021 5:53 PM To: 'Jan Lindblad (jlindbla)' ; Andy Bierman Cc: Kent Watsen ; netmod@ietf.org Subject: RE: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism Hi Jan, I like your examples of U and L systems. For the overall purpose of the draft -&g

Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism

the hood) and then it would always return that policy in a , making the leafref valid. Jason From: Jan Lindblad (jlindbla) Sent: Monday, August 23, 2021 6:50 AM To: Andy Bierman ; Sterne, Jason (Nokia - CA/Ottawa) Cc: Kent Watsen ; netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] system configuration

Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism

Hi, Sorry for getting late into this already unwieldy thread. Similar discussions have been flaring up regularly for as long as this work group has existed, and we have never been able to put it to final rest. At the heart of the issue is the age old division between "unpredictable" and "lazy"

Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism

Hi, I guess I do not agree with the premise of the draft, which is that the client needs to take over control of the system-controlled configuration. I will wait for a draft update and see if that helps understand it better. Andy On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 11:21 AM Kent Watsen wrote: > > >IMO t

Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism

> >IMO this draft overlaps the factory-default datastore. > >Unfortunately, RFC 8808 does not document NMDA, Appendix A3 details > >https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8342#appendix-A.3 > > > >It does not say if datastore feeds int

Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism

Hi, Andy: A few clarifications below. >发件人: netmod [mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org] 代表 Andy Bierman >发送时间: 2021年8月17日 3:21 >收件人: Kent Watsen >>抄送: netmod@ietf.org 主题: Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism On Sun, Aug 15, 2021 at 12:49 PM Kent Watsen mailto:kent%2b

Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism

On Sun, Aug 15, 2021 at 12:49 PM Kent Watsen wrote: > > It was a different email I think proposing extensions instead of a > datastore. > > > This email: > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/SHRPSxHIDxsfF2t0GXXiyFHOnGw/ > > What is the purpose of system-configuration Use-case A)Th

Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism

> It was a different email I think proposing extensions instead of a datastore. This email: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/SHRPSxHIDxsfF2t0GXXiyFHOnGw/ K. ___

Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism

) > *Cc:* Juergen Schoenwaelder ; Kent > Watsen ; NetMod WG > *Subject:* Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism > > > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 2:51 PM Sterne, Jason (Nokia - CA/Ottawa) < > jason.ste...@nokia.com> wrote: > > Hi guys, >

Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism

Thx Kent. Please see inline. Jason From: Kent Watsen Sent: Monday, August 9, 2021 9:59 PM To: Andy Bierman Cc: Sterne, Jason (Nokia - CA/Ottawa) ; netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism There was a request for concrete use cases. This email from before was

Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism

Hi Andy, Pls see inline. Jason From: Andy Bierman Sent: Monday, August 9, 2021 6:23 PM To: Sterne, Jason (Nokia - CA/Ottawa) Cc: Juergen Schoenwaelder ; Kent Watsen ; NetMod WG Subject: Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 2:51 PM Sterne, Jason (Nokia

Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism

There was a request for concrete use cases. This email from before was good: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/v5cNLcC2F_OT8t-407F3Zj6Vws4/ More below: > On Aug 9, 2021, at 6:23 PM, Andy Bierman

Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism

created nodes with origin=system is already supported by NMDA. > > > Jason > Andy > > > > > *From:* netmod *On Behalf Of *Andy Bierman > *Sent:* Wednesday, August 4, 2021 9:59 AM > *To:* Juergen Schoenwaelder ; Kent > Watsen ; Andy Bierman ; NetMod W

Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism

ex. Jason From: netmod On Behalf Of Andy Bierman Sent: Wednesday, August 4, 2021 9:59 AM To: Juergen Schoenwaelder ; Kent Watsen ; Andy Bierman ; NetMod WG Subject: Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism On Wed, Aug 4, 2021 at 6:39 AM Jürgen Schönwälder mailto:j.schoenwael...@jacob

Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism

On Wed, Aug 4, 2021 at 6:39 AM Jürgen Schönwälder < j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de> wrote: > The figure in RFC 8342 section 5 documents what was agreed upon > before. System configuration flows into but not upwards > into . Over the years, we discussed several corner cases > (including thin

Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism

The figure in RFC 8342 section 5 documents what was agreed upon before. System configuration flows into but not upwards into . Over the years, we discussed several corner cases (including things like configuring a new user and the system automatically assigns an unused uid, which afterwards needs

Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism

On Wed, Aug 4, 2021 at 5:34 AM Kent Watsen wrote: > > I am confused by the confusion ;) > > You all know that JUNOS implemented this concept before YANG was even a > thing, right? > > Admittedly, it’s not a “datastore“, but flexing the NMDA is where we can > do better. > > A “with-system” mechan

Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism

I am confused by the confusion ;) You all know that JUNOS implemented this concept before YANG was even a thing, right? Admittedly, it’s not a “datastore“, but flexing the NMDA is where we can do better. A “with-system” mechanism could also work. The only downside is the inability for a

Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism

Hi, I do not agree that a new datastore is needed to supposedly retrieve the system created nodes that exist (already supported by get-data) or the nodes that could be created by the server but do not currently exist. The element is way too simplistic to represent all the real-world possibiliti

Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism

Hi, Andy, Apologize for my chiming in. Please see my reply inline. From: netmod [mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Andy Bierman Sent: Wednesday, August 4, 2021 1:11 AM To: Fengchong (frank) Cc: Balázs Lengyel ; netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] 答复: system configuration sync mecha

Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism

> I prefer neither. > I think NMDA with an origin-filter and/or with-origin parameter > already solves this problem. Some of the nodes defined in may be referenced by nodes defined in . There is a desire for the nodes to not be defined only in , for online/offline validation. K. _

Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism

On Mon, Aug 2, 2021 at 3:31 PM Kent Watsen wrote: > > Hi Balazs, Andy, Quifang, > > I agree a new datastore will just add complexity without any value. > Your solution approach is better, but I think it would require a new YANG > version > to allow config node XPath to reference non-config nodes.

Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism

Hi Balazs, Andy, Quifang, > I agree a new datastore will just add complexity without any value. > Your solution approach is better, but I think it would require a new YANG > version > to allow config node XPath to reference non-config nodes. In no case is there a need for a config Xpath to ref

Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism

already implemented. > +1 Actually, separate running and system would be a radical change, not this. Cleaner and less disruptive. If I misunderstood your intent, then sorry. > > > > Regards Balazs > > > Andy > *From:* netmod *On Behalf Of *maqiufang (A) > *Sent:* 2

Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism

ius 31., szombat 14:33 To: Kent Watsen ; netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism Hi, Kent, Thanks for helping me revive this thread, which is exactly what I want to do.:) There was not a very fully discussion due to time constraints, but we did see some valua

Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism

between option1 and option3. Best Regards, Qiufang Ma From: netmod [mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Kent Watsen Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2021 1:09 AM To: netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism WG, Regarding yesterday’s datastore presentation

Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism

> From: Kent Watsen [mailto:kent+i...@watsen.net] > Sent: Friday, July 16, 2021 2:55 AM > To: maqiufang (A) > Cc: netmod@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism > > Hi Qiufang, > > [snip] > The question is if the server impleme

Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism

Hi, Kent, Please see my reply inline. From: Kent Watsen [mailto:kent+i...@watsen.net] Sent: Friday, July 16, 2021 2:55 AM To: maqiufang (A) Cc: netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism Hi Qiufang, [snip] The question is if the server implementation

Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism

Hi Qiufang, > Hi , Kent: > Apologies for the delay. I missed your reply and never saw it in my > inbox(bugs?) L. > Thanks for the detailed examples and explanation, and now I have a better > understanding about your proposal. > Please see my reply inline. No worries about the delay. I didn’t

Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism

Hi , Kent: Apologies for the delay. I missed your reply and never saw it in my inbox(bugs?) :(. Thanks for the detailed examples and explanation, and now I have a better understanding about your proposal. Please see my reply inline. [likewise snip...] For the second category, imagine containi

Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism

[Thanks for removing NETCONF from the CC] Hi Qiufang, > Right, the loopback interface is a common example but, more generally, I > think "resource-independent” configuration might fall into exactly two > categories: > > 1) config that is “applied” immediately >

Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism

Hi, Kent: From: Kent Watsen [mailto:kent+i...@watsen.net] Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2021 6:51 AM To: maqiufang (A) Cc: netc...@ietf.org; netmod@ietf.org Subject: Re: system configuration sync mechanism [CC-ing NETMOD, as I think this discussion belongs on that list...please consider removing NE

Re: [netmod] system configuration sync mechanism

[CC-ing NETMOD, as I think this discussion belongs on that list...please consider removing NETCONF in your reply] Hi Qiufang, > Hi, Kent: > Thanks for kicking off some discussion around this draft. Please see my reply > inline. I'm interested in this work, as it seems as if the datastore wa