[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Verbs Again (was RE: draft-shafer-netconf-syslog-00.txt)
Phil Shafer wrote:
Andy Bierman writes:
We spent about 5 years developing a set of standard operations
for the standard manipulation of NV-stored configuration data
models encoded in XML.
Five years? Wow... "And thank you so much for bringing up such a
painful subject. While you're at it, why don't you give me a nice
paper cut and pour lemon juice on it?" (-- Miracle Max)
And why do we have <get> and <get-config> again?
To retrieve data
<get> was the "thar be dragons" part of the spec. <get-config>
seemed so much safer. ;^)
Doesn't really matter if it's <get> or <get-config>.
I'm not willing to accept a solution path that starts out with
little piles of unrelated "pseudo-data models" which do not
utilize the standard operations we already have.
I think that managing 100s or 1000s of <get-foo> and
even <set-foo> functions, which ignores the <candidate>,
<running>, <startup> model variants, ignores <edit-config>,
and does not show up at all when I do a <copy-config>,
<get-config>, or <get> operation -- is a fairly broken design.
This isn't a hard problem.
We just define a data model and instead of reflexively
labeling everything max-access read-only, we label it
As far as data organization, again, not a hard problem.
1) Define a namespace for netconf data:
2) Define a structure to organize data and separate config
from state data, e.g.:
3) Transfer the pseudo-data model to the appropriate container
and call it a real data model.
to unsubscribe send a message to email@example.com with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.