[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Canonical configuration database order
- To: "Netconf (E-mail)" <email@example.com>
- Subject: Canonical configuration database order
- From: Andy Bierman <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2006 08:30:21 -0700
- User-agent: Thunderbird 220.127.116.11 (Windows/20060308)
This may be data-model specific, but maybe not.
The SMI uses OIDs to name data, which implies a
canonical order of all possible data (lexi-next in this case).
A canonical order is useful for implementing a diff-config RPC.
CLIs maintain an internal canonical order, even if the user
enters instanced data in a different order (e.g., interface command).
In XML you need to distinguish between multiple named instances
(e.g., a key is defined) vs. multiple unnamed instances (e.g., maxOccurs
The canonical order for named sibling instances is the natural sort order,
based on the key associated with the nodes. For multiple unnamed
instances, the ordinal position (0 to N-1) uniquely identifies each
node within a set of sibling nodes. The canonical order of unnamed
instances should not be changed from the PDU order. However, agent
merge order of unnamed instances is data-model specific.
Is this something of interest to the WG, or something that
every vendor should (potentially) do differently?
to unsubscribe send a message to email@example.com with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.