Andy Bierman <ietf@andybierman.com> wrote:
Andy Bierman wrote:
Hi,
IMO, the <validate> command is not actually useful for 'inline'
configuration validation.
I think the WG should decide what to do about this problem:
1) Ignore it
2) Document it
3) Fix it
IMO, the proper engineering fix requires 2 independent changes:
1) Add a 'test-only' enumeration to the (edit-config) test-option
parameter. (Remember that this entire parameter is only supported
if the :validate capability is supported. This change could
be done as a validate-2.0 capability, and not change the 1.0 capability.
I think this would be a very useful enhancement.
2) Remove configInlineType as one of the options for the 'source'
parameter in the validate operation. (Make it the same data type
as the getConfig source parameter).
That means that you could only <validate> the 'candidate', 'running'
or 'startup'? I think this would be fine, b/c test-only is a much
more useful operation. [side note: does it make sense to validate
'running'?]
/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/>