[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Multiple "Running" configurations
> From: William Caban [mailto:william@hpcf.upr.edu]
> If I'm not wrong vendors will be able to define custom "objects" for the
> protocol so if a vendor want to support a different granular access to
> the running configuration what would be stopping him from defining an
> XML like this to copy the running config from node 0 (however is
> defined) to the startup config of node 5.
>
> <copy-config>
> <source>
> <running>
> <node node-id="0" />
> </running>
> </source>
> <target>
> <startup>
> <node node-id="5" />
> </startup>
> </target>
> <format>text</format>
> </copy-config>
>
Actually, William, what you are suggesting would not be allowed. There are
some places, yes, where vendor-specific information will go. Currently, the
"source" and "target" fields of the copy, lock, and validate messages are
not included in those places.
The lines
<node node-id="0" />
<node node-id="5" />
in your example above would not be allowed.
Keith Allen
SBC Labs
9505 Arboretum Blvd.
Austin, TX 78759
(512) 372-5741
keith_allen@labs.sbc.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: William Caban [mailto:william@hpcf.upr.edu]
> Sent: Monday, September 15, 2003 4:18 PM
> To: Faye Ly
> Cc: NetConf
> Subject: RE: Multiple "Running" configurations
>
> If I'm not wrong vendors will be able to define custom "objects" for the
> protocol so if a vendor want to support a different granular access to
> the running configuration what would be stopping him from defining an
> XML like this to copy the running config from node 0 (however is
> defined) to the startup config of node 5.
>
> <copy-config>
> <source>
> <running>
> <node node-id="0" />
> </running>
> </source>
> <target>
> <startup>
> <node node-id="5" />
> </startup>
> </target>
> <format>text</format>
> </copy-config>
>
> or by name:
>
> <copy-config>
> <source>
> <running>
> <node name="switch0" />
> </running>
> </source>
> <target>
> <startup>
> <node name="switch5" />
> </startup>
> </target>
> <format>text</format>
> </copy-config>
>
>
>
> Disclaimer: I don't speak fluent XML yet. Examples for demo of the
> concept.
>
>
> -William
>
>
> On Mon, 2003-09-15 at 16:34, Faye Ly wrote:
> > Phil,
> >
> > Yes, this will work with most of the configuration. How about file
> > upload (backup) or download (restore)? How do I say, download
> > 'chassis1.cfg' file to chassis 1? Without affecting everything else?
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > -faye
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Phil Shafer [mailto:phil@juniper.net]
> > Sent: Monday, September 15, 2003 12:16 PM
> > To: Faye Ly
> > Cc: Allen, Keith; netconf@ops.ietf.org
> > Subject: Re: Multiple "Running" configurations
> >
> > "Faye Ly" writes:
> > >Partial configuration and separate configuration file have different
> > >naming? Unless you can somehow make the naming smart enough for both?
> >
> > A simple example would be:
> >
> > <configuration>
> > <system>
> > <login>
> > <message>Get off my box!</message>
> > <users>
> > <user>
> > <name>phil</name>
> > <uid>-1</uid>
> > <full-name>Phil Shafer</full-name>
> > </user>
> > </users>
> > </login>
> > </system>
> > </configuration>
> >
> > We toss system/login/message into /etc/motd and system/login/users
> > into /etc/master.passwd. The user need not know these are different
> > files.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Phil
> >
> >
> > --
> > 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/>
> --
> William Caban <william@hpcf.upr.edu>
>
>
> --
> 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/>
--
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/>