Re: Separation of configuration and control - good or bad?

[Scott Lawrence <scott-xmlconf@skrb.org>]

Larry Menten <lmenten@lucent.com> writes:

> I'd like to see this in a future draft in place of the root-level
> merge/replace/overlay operations currently specified in the
> draft.[...]

> So what is the consensus on this issue?  I strongly favor using
> these attributes.

I'd prefer not to define attributes in the protocol which are then
applied to elements in the data model.  I'm concerned about being able
to do good design consistency checking on the complete solution that
way, since we are not (as part of netconf) defining the data model,
and possibly (probably) not the naming.

I'd prefer protocol operations expressed at the element level which
apply to data carried as content within them.  To rework the example
you posted:

  <operation-set d:xmlns="http://xml.juniper.net/junos/5.4I0/junos";>
   <insert>
      <d:protocols>
        <d:ospf>
          <d:exports>
            <d:export order="before" name="bar">foo</d:export>
          </d:exports>
          <d:areas>
            <d:area active="inactive">
              <d:name>0.0.0.1</d:name>
            </d:area>
          </d:areas>
        </d:ospf>
      </d:protocols>
    </insert>
    <replace>
      <d:protocols>
        <d:ospf>
          <d:areas>
            <d:area>
              <d:name>0.0.0.0</d:name>
              <d:interfaces>
                <d:interface>
                  <d:name>135.104.52.3</d:name>
                  <d:hello-interval>10</d:hello-interval>
                </d:interface>
            </d:area>
          </d:areas>
        </d:ospf>
      </d:protocols>
    <delete>
      <d:protocols>
        <d:ospf>
          <d:areas>
            <d:area>
              <d:name>0.0.0.0</d:name>
              <d:interfaces>
                <d:interface delete="delete">
                  <d:name>135.104.52.2</d:name>
                </d:interface>
              </d:interfaces>
            </d:area>
          </d:areas>
        </d:ospf>
      </d:protocols>
    <delete>
  </operation-set>

That having been said, I'm intrigued by the idea of specifying data
using Xpath expressions, which might well dramatically reduce the
verbosity of the above.

-- 
Scott Lawrence        
  Actively seeking work 
  http://skrb.org/scott/
  [ <lawrence@world.std.com> is deprecated ]


--
to unsubscribe send a message to netconf-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/netconf/>