Re: url clarification

[Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>]

Phil Shafer <phil@juniper.net> wrote:
> Martin Bjorklund writes:
> >I once asked what it means to lock a remote url.  Now I might have
> >found the answer.  The text in section 8.8.5 and the schema differ, and
> >that usually means that the text is correct.  The schema allows a
> ><url> element as a  <lock> target, but the text in 8.8.5 does not.
> >Does this mean that you can't lock a url?
> 
> The original idea was that the world was divided into two halves,
> databases and files.  Files could be overwritten and fetched, but
> did not have/require the additional overhead of being searchable,
> replacable, lockable, etc.

This makes sense.

> So you could copy-config a file, but
> not edit-config or lock-config it.

Aha, not even edit-config?  That's explicitly allowed by 8.8.5.1.   



/martin

--
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/>