Subject: Re: [netmod] Y45 wrap up

From: Randy Presuhn <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2015 10:12:15 -0700 (GMT-07:00)

Hi -

>From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]>
>Sent: Apr 24, 2015 12:37 AM
>To: Andy Bierman <[email-masked]>
>Cc: "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>
>Subject: Re: [netmod] Y45 wrap up
...
>The assumption that the set of imports used by all modules determines
>the version of modules a server implements does not work with the goal
>that a server implements exactly one version of every module. This
...

The goal that "a server implements exactly one version" strikes
me as unrealistic for multi-vendor / "open" systems and systems
with hot swappable (redundant) component subsystems.

Randy

---

From: Andy Bierman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2015 10:23:54 -0700

> with hot swappable (redundant) component subsystems.

But this is fairly unmanageable.
You are suggesting (for example) that the interface instances
on line card 1 are from rev 1, and the interface instances from
line card 2 are from rev 5, etc.

At this point, static conformance is worthless.  You need run-time
operations to ask the server implementation what it will accept.

Or you use trial-and-error and do not have the luxury of coding
to the data model.  You build data silos so you can try obscere
undocumented tricks to know what is really supported.
Oh wait, that's how SNMP and CLI work today. Hopefully we
will do better with YANG. Maybe some future version.

> Randy

Andy

>
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod